Will the winner of Joshua v Klitschko have to give up one of the world titles?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by JSpar, Feb 9, 2017.


  1. JSpar

    JSpar New Member Full Member

    54
    10
    Feb 29, 2016
    Both the WBA and the IBF have ordered the winner to face their mandatory in their next fight.

    Can one of the governing bodies be convinced otherwise?

    What scenarios could play out here?

    It's particularly frustrating as it seemed the heavyweight division was going in the right direction - i.e. unification.
     
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    #1
  2. Solid Snake

    Solid Snake New Member banned Full Member

    8
    6
    Feb 8, 2017
    Perhaps not, if Joshua wins. WBA don't really enforce them (remember their 'tournament' lol) and Luis Ortiz looks like he's hunting down the easiest route to a title now in Wilder.

    Joshua might be able to get their if he fights Pulev next and I think he's also looking for a unification so he might be granted an exemption.

    Klitschko might find himself in the same situation as Fury was in with the IBF given I think there is a rematch clause however I think Wlad might retire if he wins anyway.
     
    Solid Snake, Feb 9, 2017
    Solid Snake, Feb 9, 2017
    #2
  3. Robney

    Robney ᴻᴼ ᴸᴼᴻᴳᴲᴿ ᴲ۷ᴵᴸ Full Member

    93,128
    27,857
    Jan 18, 2010
    They will find a solution.
    Certainly if Wlad wins, he has managed this all his career and might need to fight 2 mandatories in a row, but I doubt we get another Fury situation.
     
    Robney, Feb 9, 2017
    Robney, Feb 9, 2017
    #3
  4. JSpar

    JSpar New Member Full Member

    54
    10
    Feb 29, 2016
    I do remember that 'tournament'! However, it seems they are now trying to breathe life into it again. The Joshua/Klitschko winner is supposed to face Ortiz and the Briggs/Oquendo winner to face Ustinov. And then the two remaining winners face off for the WBA world title (no more 'regular' or 'super' or 'interim'...). If they do pursue this, it could cause issues for the Joshua/Klitschko winner if they have to also deal with the IBF mandatory.

    In an ideal world, I'd love to see the following take place in 2017:

    - Parker beats H. Fury;
    - Joshua fights Klitschko;
    - The winner of Joshua/Klitschko faces one of the mandatories while being allowed to keep the other belt;
    - Parker fights Wilder;
    - The winners face for all four world titles.

    Will it ever happen? Dreams are free.
     
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    #4
  5. yesihavearm2

    yesihavearm2 ESB Chinchecker Full Member

    9,890
    5,155
    May 30, 2008
    Who knows with the IBF.

    They seemed absolutely determined to strip Fury as soon as he won the belt even though they knew that he had a rematch clause in place and Wlad was their long-standing champion.

    Guess Duva made a nice "donation" as they thought Glazkov was sure to win his shot, definite karma there.

    I would say a bought with Ortiz is more likely for either fighter as Pulev has already turned down 3 career high offers to face Joshua, and he knows he can't beat Wlad.
     
    yesihavearm2, Feb 9, 2017
    yesihavearm2, Feb 9, 2017
    #5
    kriszhao likes this.
  6. JSpar

    JSpar New Member Full Member

    54
    10
    Feb 29, 2016
    If there is a rematch clause for the Joshua v Klitschko fight, and either fighter chooses to enforce it, then given the public positions taken by the WBA and the IBF (that the winner has to face their mandatory next), then the Joshua/Klitschko winner may be stripped of one or even both titles...
     
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    JSpar, Feb 9, 2017
    #6