Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good comp?

Printable View

02-23-2009, 08:00 PM
Rantcatrat

Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good comp?

Cotto and Pavlik each soundly defeated their respective foes this past weekend. For good reason, however, the opponents, were not world class.

Pavlik has made three defenses of the belts he took from Jermain Taylor against Jermain Taylor, Gary Locket, and now Rubio. Because of his defeat at the hands of Bhop in November, the Rubio fight was understandable, and in his defense, Rubio was a top-ten ranked middleweight (although that is probably a result of the dearth of talent at middleweight). When is it fair to be critical of Pavlik's choice of easy opponents?

Same goes for Cotto. If Cotto doesn't fight Clottey or Mosley in June and instead opts for an easy opponent, when is it fair to criticize him?

Since losing to Calzaghe, Kessler has fought Sartison and Haussler, and there is talk of him fighting another no-name fighter in Gusyml Perdomo (Kessler-Perdomo, Nuzhenko-Senchenko: Both Possible - Boxing News). Everyone understood the Sartison fight, and although there was criticism for the Haussler fight, people let it slide because of his expressed desire to face top competition. If he fights Perdomo, is it time for his ranking to drop?

Is two 'gimme' fights the limit after a loss for how many tune-ups fight fans will tolerate without criticism of a champion?
02-23-2009, 08:14 PM
killersheep

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Cotto and Pavlik each soundly defeated their respective foes this past weekend. For good reason, however, the opponents, were not world class.

Pavlik has made three defenses of the belts he took from Jermain Taylor against Jermain Taylor, Gary Locket, and now Rubio. Because of his defeat at the hands of Bhop in November, the Rubio fight was understandable, and in his defense, Rubio was a top-ten ranked middleweight (although that is probably a result of the dearth of talent at middleweight). When is it fair to be critical of Pavlik's choice of easy opponents?

Same goes for Cotto. If Cotto doesn't fight Clottey or Mosley in June and instead opts for an easy opponent, when is it fair to criticize him?

Since losing to Calzaghe, Kessler has fought Sartison and Haussler, and there is talk of him fighting another no-name fighter in Gusyml Perdomo (Kessler-Perdomo, Nuzhenko-Senchenko: Both Possible - Boxing News). Everyone understood the Sartison fight, and although there was criticism for the Haussler fight, people let it slide because of his expressed desire to face top competition. If he fights Perdomo, is it time for his ranking to drop?

Is two 'gimme' fights the limit after a loss for how many tune-ups fight fans will tolerate without criticism of a champion?

I think in large part it's how often they fight. I think that all champs should fight ring rated fighters twice a year. However it's mostly the case that these guys fight only twice a year, and in a effort to give legitamacy to the alphabets they have to fight the tomato can mandatory with the best management, so that leaves one fight a year for a good one. I don't think there is any reason to take two tune-up fights in a row.
02-23-2009, 10:00 PM
VictorCharlie

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Well I'd like to see champions fight 2-4 times a year. If you are on the low side of this then I think both should be against the top 1-3 guys in your division. If you are on the high side then I don't have a problem with a fighter take 1-2 lesser opponents. If we only had one belt and one governing body this would more often be the case. If you had one governing body I'm sure they would tell champ they had to fight the number one contender at least once a year. This would force promoters/managers to meet a time line or risk being stripped. You could even take one step further and dictate the payout percentages of champ versus challenger. This would take a lot of the haggling over who makes how much out of the equation. As it is we have to depend on a fighter to want to fight multiple times a year, fight top competition and for the Alphabets/Promoters to not get in the way. I've never understood why the US congress hasn't created a federal boxing commision that only recognizes one belt. The Alphabets would be out of a job in a heartbeat and the sport would be in much better shape
02-23-2009, 11:23 PM
C-Lo

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

I don't know. I personally think some fighters should get a tune-up or a "gimme" fight every couple of fights. I think if a person wants to gain the utmost respect, they fight a name as much as they possibly can.

For example:

Bernard Hopkins: Taylor, Taylor, Tarver, Wright, Calzaghe, Pavlik.

Manny Pacquiao: Barrera, Marquez, Diaz, De La Hoya, Hatton.

Ricky Hatton: Collazo, Urango, Castillo, Mayweather, Lazcano, Malignaggi, Pacquiao.

Shane Mosley: Vargas, Vargas, Collazo, Cotto, Mayorga, Margarito.

Juan Manuel Marquez: Barrera, Juarez, Pacquiao, Casamayor, Diaz.

Those are the top names in the game right now and if you see their consistent level of competition, that's why they're respected and elite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Cotto and Pavlik each soundly defeated their respective foes this past weekend. For good reason, however, the opponents, were not world class.

Pavlik has made three defenses of the belts he took from Jermain Taylor against Jermain Taylor, Gary Locket, and now Rubio. Because of his defeat at the hands of Bhop in November, the Rubio fight was understandable, and in his defense, Rubio was a top-ten ranked middleweight (although that is probably a result of the dearth of talent at middleweight). When is it fair to be critical of Pavlik's choice of easy opponents?

Same goes for Cotto. If Cotto doesn't fight Clottey or Mosley in June and instead opts for an easy opponent, when is it fair to criticize him?

Since losing to Calzaghe, Kessler has fought Sartison and Haussler, and there is talk of him fighting another no-name fighter in Gusyml Perdomo (Kessler-Perdomo, Nuzhenko-Senchenko: Both Possible - Boxing News). Everyone understood the Sartison fight, and although there was criticism for the Haussler fight, people let it slide because of his expressed desire to face top competition. If he fights Perdomo, is it time for his ranking to drop?

Is two 'gimme' fights the limit after a loss for how many tune-ups fight fans will tolerate without criticism of a champion?

Just to clarify, the Pavlik vs Taylor rematch wasn't for the titles. I think they fought at 164 so the titles weren't on the line.
02-24-2009, 12:16 PM
Gandalf

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-Lo

I don't know. I personally think some fighters should get a tune-up or a "gimme" fight every couple of fights. I think if a person wants to gain the utmost respect, they fight a name as much as they possibly can.

For example:

Bernard Hopkins: Taylor, Taylor, Tarver, Wright, Calzaghe, Pavlik.

Manny Pacquiao: Barrera, Marquez, Diaz, De La Hoya, Hatton.

Ricky Hatton: Collazo, Urango, Castillo, Mayweather, Lazcano, Malignaggi, Pacquiao.

Shane Mosley: Vargas, Vargas, Collazo, Cotto, Mayorga, Margarito.

Juan Manuel Marquez: Barrera, Juarez, Pacquiao, Casamayor, Diaz.

Those are the top names in the game right now and if you see their consistent level of competition, that's why they're respected and elite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Cotto and Pavlik each soundly defeated their respective foes this past weekend. For good reason, however, the opponents, were not world class.

Pavlik has made three defenses of the belts he took from Jermain Taylor against Jermain Taylor, Gary Locket, and now Rubio. Because of his defeat at the hands of Bhop in November, the Rubio fight was understandable, and in his defense, Rubio was a top-ten ranked middleweight (although that is probably a result of the dearth of talent at middleweight). When is it fair to be critical of Pavlik's choice of easy opponents?

Same goes for Cotto. If Cotto doesn't fight Clottey or Mosley in June and instead opts for an easy opponent, when is it fair to criticize him?

Since losing to Calzaghe, Kessler has fought Sartison and Haussler, and there is talk of him fighting another no-name fighter in Gusyml Perdomo (Kessler-Perdomo, Nuzhenko-Senchenko: Both Possible - Boxing News). Everyone understood the Sartison fight, and although there was criticism for the Haussler fight, people let it slide because of his expressed desire to face top competition. If he fights Perdomo, is it time for his ranking to drop?

Is two 'gimme' fights the limit after a loss for how many tune-ups fight fans will tolerate without criticism of a champion?

Just to clarify, the Pavlik vs Taylor rematch wasn't for the titles. I think they fought at 164 so the titles weren't on the line.

I agree with those fighters all fighting top level opposition, though I have reservations about Hopkins. Two of his last 3 fights were against guys jumping almost two weight divisions. I think Hopkins was being crafty to get more big names on his resume. Though they are obviously big names.
02-24-2009, 01:14 PM
fan johnny

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

I for one thing you are looking at this from the wrong perspective.

There should be no such thing as a tuneup fight for any fighter holding a belt. All legitimate challengers have the "right" to fight for the championship.

The holder of the belt should have to face a challenger within 180 days of his last match. If he champion is unable to fight, then he doesn't deserve to hold the title does he? or lay out your reasoning for why you think he does.

If you want to give him some symbolic title, if he fails to face a mandated challenger then might be the right thing to do, but he should have to face the legitimate challenger.

Tuneup fights are for those fighters that have the image and draw, or for a fighter waiting for his payday to arrive.

Perhaps a term like exhibition match would be more appropriate use for a tuneup fight?
02-24-2009, 01:17 PM
skel1983

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

It all depends on the situation, i mean if you have lost your previous fight in a big showdown against another elite boxer, i think your entitled to come back with a sort of warm up/easier on paper bout, similar to Cotto and Pavlik, but if your on roll i dont see why the top guys dont fight other top guys every fight, i hear alot of fighters saying you cant expect to fight p4p star every fight but i disagree these top guys fight twice a year. It's not as if there fighting four times a year.

I mean Pavlik fighting Duddy or Mora is a fucking disgrace imo he has just fought a stiff in his comeback fight after his first defeat he needs to get back in there and there is plenty of fights the boxing fans want to see.

Again id be dissapointed if Cotto fights Cintron, i feel Cintron is on the slide and has looked like that in his last three fights, Cotto should be fighting Berto or Mosley in his next fight.
02-24-2009, 02:21 PM
luvfightgame

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by skel1983

It all depends on the situation, i mean if you have lost your previous fight in a big showdown against another elite boxer, i think your entitled to come back with a sort of warm up/easier on paper bout, similar to Cotto and Pavlik, but if your on roll i dont see why the top guys dont fight other top guys every fight, i hear alot of fighters saying you cant expect to fight p4p star every fight but i disagree these top guys fight twice a year. It's not as if there fighting four times a year.

I mean Pavlik fighting Duddy or Mora is a fucking disgrace imo he has just fought a stiff in his comeback fight after his first defeat he needs to get back in there and there is plenty of fights the boxing fans want to see.

Again id be dissapointed if Cotto fights Cintron, i feel Cintron is on the slide and has looked like that in his last three fights, Cotto should be fighting Berto or Mosley in his next fight.

I agree with most of your post. The only problem is in the example of Cotto. Let's say he fights Berto and Mosley in his next 2 fights, who's next? Sometimes there's not enough top level fighters. Same for Pavlik. He fights Abraham next fight, then who's the big name out there at middleweight?
02-24-2009, 02:22 PM
Drago

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by fan johnny

I for one thing you are looking at this from the wrong perspective.

There should be no such thing as a tuneup fight for any fighter holding a belt. All legitimate challengers have the "right" to fight for the championship.

The holder of the belt should have to face a challenger within 180 days of his last match. If he champion is unable to fight, then he doesn't deserve to hold the title does he? or lay out your reasoning for why you think he does.

If you want to give him some symbolic title, if he fails to face a mandated challenger then might be the right thing to do, but he should have to face the legitimate challenger.

Tuneup fights are for those fighters that have the image and draw, or for a fighter waiting for his payday to arrive.

Perhaps a term like exhibition match would be more appropriate use for a tuneup fight?

good post, its a world title at the end of the day, not a pick & choose u can do that before u win the title.
02-24-2009, 02:23 PM
Drago

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

oh wait i forgot abt MONEY thats all that matters for some champs
02-24-2009, 02:46 PM
skel1983

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

Quote:

Originally Posted by skel1983

It all depends on the situation, i mean if you have lost your previous fight in a big showdown against another elite boxer, i think your entitled to come back with a sort of warm up/easier on paper bout, similar to Cotto and Pavlik, but if your on roll i dont see why the top guys dont fight other top guys every fight, i hear alot of fighters saying you cant expect to fight p4p star every fight but i disagree these top guys fight twice a year. It's not as if there fighting four times a year.

I mean Pavlik fighting Duddy or Mora is a fucking disgrace imo he has just fought a stiff in his comeback fight after his first defeat he needs to get back in there and there is plenty of fights the boxing fans want to see.

Again id be dissapointed if Cotto fights Cintron, i feel Cintron is on the slide and has looked like that in his last three fights, Cotto should be fighting Berto or Mosley in his next fight.

I agree with most of your post. The only problem is in the example of Cotto. Let's say he fights Berto and Mosley in his next 2 fights, who's next? Sometimes there's not enough top level fighters. Same for Pavlik. He fights Abraham next fight, then who's the big name out there at middleweight?

Yes of course, i can understand that. While there is elite compitition around you have to face them if not well thats fair enough, i think Cotto is a great fighter and has possibly 5/6 elite boxers to choose from if the $$ is right, as for Pavlik well i know we all want to see Abraham asap, but there is a few names that he should be fighting rather than John Duddy just so he gets a nice few million bucks to put a beat down on an untested challanger.

id prefer to see him in with Strum, Mundine, Winky, Williams or even up to 168 against Kessler or a Bute.

I think belts mean shit these days and we all want to see fights where fighters move about weights to make the best fights possible, in recent times Hatton,Calzaghe,Pac,Marquez have done it and i like it.
02-24-2009, 03:04 PM
luvfightgame

Re: Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good co

Quote:

Originally Posted by skel1983

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvfightgame

Quote:

Originally Posted by skel1983

It all depends on the situation, i mean if you have lost your previous fight in a big showdown against another elite boxer, i think your entitled to come back with a sort of warm up/easier on paper bout, similar to Cotto and Pavlik, but if your on roll i dont see why the top guys dont fight other top guys every fight, i hear alot of fighters saying you cant expect to fight p4p star every fight but i disagree these top guys fight twice a year. It's not as if there fighting four times a year.

I mean Pavlik fighting Duddy or Mora is a fucking disgrace imo he has just fought a stiff in his comeback fight after his first defeat he needs to get back in there and there is plenty of fights the boxing fans want to see.

Again id be dissapointed if Cotto fights Cintron, i feel Cintron is on the slide and has looked like that in his last three fights, Cotto should be fighting Berto or Mosley in his next fight.

I agree with most of your post. The only problem is in the example of Cotto. Let's say he fights Berto and Mosley in his next 2 fights, who's next? Sometimes there's not enough top level fighters. Same for Pavlik. He fights Abraham next fight, then who's the big name out there at middleweight?

Yes of course, i can understand that. While there is elite compitition around you have to face them if not well thats fair enough, i think Cotto is a great fighter and has possibly 5/6 elite boxers to choose from if the $$ is right, as for Pavlik well i know we all want to see Abraham asap, but there is a few names that he should be fighting rather than John Duddy just so he gets a nice few million bucks to put a beat down on an untested challanger.

id prefer to see him in with Strum, Mundine, Winky, Williams or even up to 168 against Kessler or a Bute.

I think belts mean shit these days and we all want to see fights where fighters move about weights to make the best fights possible, in recent times Hatton,Calzaghe,Pac,Marquez have done it and i like it.

Agreed. SRL, Duran, Hearns, Hagler all moved around to face each other. I would like to see that also. It does screw up the rankings though and the chances for unknown guys to move up and get a title shot when guys are switching weight classes.

I think Pavlik would handle Sturm, Mundine, and Williams fairly easily.