Most frustrating negotiations in boxing history

Part of what us boxing fans are forced to live with, are the ridiculously frustrating negotiations that sometimes occur between superstar fighters. Whether it's the promoters, the fighters themselves, whatever. These processes sometimes take years and years (sucking the excitement out these prospective fights)... and sometimes end up never happening at all. Throughout history, which fights do you consider the most maddening and frustrating as far as the negotiations are concerned? Whether the fight happened or not. I'll begin by throwing three out there for consideration.


1. Floyd-Pac: It finally happened... but years after the expiration date. Us fans were forced to finally settle for an inferior version of what should've been a once-in-a-millennium fight.

2. Wilder-Joshua: I've said it on another thread and I'll say it on this one. I couldn't care less, nor do I have the inside scoop to say who's fault it was. But the negotiations for this fight got so frustrating it made some fans want to fly over and slap some people around. Finally... in came Tyson Fury and saved the day by taking on Wilder.

3. Spence-Crawford: This one is rapidly approaching "I don't care if ever happens" territory. I see more back-and-forth on Facebook than we'll probably see in the fight itself IF... it ever happens.


They leave us hanging... and having pointless arguments with each other over who's ducking whom. Rich. :rolleyes:



Any other fights in this category?

Floyd v Paç Man was the biggest waste of time ever in the history of boxing.

Tyson v Spinks took some time to get made with Tyson clearing up the belts whilst Spinks took the novelty fights.

Bowe avoided Lennox and when he was ready Lewis lost the title.

Roy Jones v Benn/Eubank was mooted but never materialised.

Maybe the fighter's are getting too much for easier defences and not enough for the riskier fights?

Manny vs Floyd
BHOP vs Roy (2002-2004)
Bowe vs Lewis
Spence vs Crawford

Calzaghe could not agree to face Ottko when he would have beaten him easily. Tarnished his name for me as Sven unified titles in front of Joe making him look second rate.

Hopkins used Calzaghe instead of facing him at super middleweight because he preferred to move to light heavyweight and take on Tarver.

Eubank and Benn would not even entertain taking on Herol Graham as he would humiliate them.

Hagler v Hearns 2 could not be agreed which was a shame.

Tyson v Holyfield, before he went to jail, was a drama and I feel team Holyfield were glad he was imprisoned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Part of what us boxing fans are forced to live with, are the ridiculously frustrating negotiations that sometimes occur between superstar fighters. Whether it's the promoters, the fighters themselves, whatever. These processes sometimes take years and years (sucking the excitement out these prospective fights)... and sometimes end up never happening at all. Throughout history, which fights do you consider the most maddening and frustrating as far as the negotiations are concerned? Whether the fight happened or not. I'll begin by throwing three out there for consideration.


1. Floyd-Pac: It finally happened... but years after the expiration date. Us fans were forced to finally settle for an inferior version of what should've been a once-in-a-millennium fight.

2. Wilder-Joshua: I've said it on another thread and I'll say it on this one. I couldn't care less, nor do I have the inside scoop to say who's fault it was. But the negotiations for this fight got so frustrating it made some fans want to fly over and slap some people around. Finally... in came Tyson Fury and saved the day by taking on Wilder.

3. Spence-Crawford: This one is rapidly approaching "I don't care if ever happens" territory. I see more back-and-forth on Facebook than we'll probably see in the fight itself IF... it ever happens.


They leave us hanging... and having pointless arguments with each other over who's ducking whom. Rich. :rolleyes:



Any other fights in this category?

---

But Spence is the only side talking now. Crawford's people aren't saying a thing. I could have sworn this could have been made for this November. It was so close and then it fell apart.

What intrigues me is that these guys fight so infrequently nowadays so they aren’t earning. You would think they would jump at the deal.

We should boycott Spence and Crawford until they fight each other.

Sick of the pair of them.

Crawford should be the one to bend and accept the terms like Haney did.

Spence moves up to 154 and Crawford picks up the crumbs at 147.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Calzaghe could not agree to face Ottko when he would have beaten him easily. Tarnished his name for me as Sven unified titles in front of Joe making him look second rate.

Hopkins used Calzaghe instead of facing him at super middleweight because he preferred to move to light heavyweight and take on Tarver.

Eubank and Benn would not even entertain taking on Herol Graham as he would humiliate them.

Hagler v Hearns 2 could not be agreed which was a shame.

Tyson v Holyfield, before he went to jail, was a drama and I feel team Holyfield were glad he was imprisoned.

---

Evander moved up to fight Tyson specifically. Tyson was supposed to fight him after Douglas but lost, and then was supposed to fight him again but went to prison. If anything Evander was upset because he wanted the legitimacy and paydays a Tyson win would bring him. If there is one guy who never ducked anyone it is Evander- he always sought out the toughest competition and always had a “thing” for Tyson specifically. I don’t see any way you can come to the conclusion that Evander was part of any drama in any of those lead ups or negotiations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Calzaghe could not agree to face Ottko when he would have beaten him easily. Tarnished his name for me as Sven unified titles in front of Joe making him look second rate.

Hopkins used Calzaghe instead of facing him at super middleweight because he preferred to move to light heavyweight and take on Tarver.

Eubank and Benn would not even entertain taking on Herol Graham as he would humiliate them.

Hagler v Hearns 2 could not be agreed which was a shame.

Tyson v Holyfield, before he went to jail, was a drama and I feel team Holyfield were glad he was imprisoned.

---

Evander moved up to fight Tyson specifically. Tyson was supposed to fight him after Douglas but lost, and then was supposed to fight him again but went to prison. If anything Evander was upset because he wanted the legitimacy and paydays a Tyson win would bring him. If there is one guy who never ducked anyone it is Evander- he always sought out the toughest competition and always had a “thing” for Tyson specifically. I don’t see any way you can come to the conclusion that Evander was part of any drama in any of those lead ups or negotiations.

---

I agree Holyfield would take the fight to Tyson but "Team" Holyfield which had the Duva's would not have minded avoiding Tyson. They took on Foreman because the Tyson fight could not be agreed.

I feel that Tyson, pre-jail, would have beaten the lighter and less musclebound Holyfield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Calzaghe could not agree to face Ottko when he would have beaten him easily. Tarnished his name for me as Sven unified titles in front of Joe making him look second rate.

Hopkins used Calzaghe instead of facing him at super middleweight because he preferred to move to light heavyweight and take on Tarver.

Eubank and Benn would not even entertain taking on Herol Graham as he would humiliate them.

Hagler v Hearns 2 could not be agreed which was a shame.

Tyson v Holyfield, before he went to jail, was a drama and I feel team Holyfield were glad he was imprisoned.

---

Evander moved up to fight Tyson specifically. Tyson was supposed to fight him after Douglas but lost, and then was supposed to fight him again but went to prison. If anything Evander was upset because he wanted the legitimacy and paydays a Tyson win would bring him. If there is one guy who never ducked anyone it is Evander- he always sought out the toughest competition and always had a “thing” for Tyson specifically. I don’t see any way you can come to the conclusion that Evander was part of any drama in any of those lead ups or negotiations.

---

I agree Holyfield would take the fight to Tyson but "Team" Holyfield which had the Duva's would not have minded avoiding Tyson. They took on Foreman because the Tyson fight could not be agreed.

I feel that Tyson, pre-jail, would have beaten the lighter and less musclebound Holyfield.

---

I respect your opinion and perspective- it is rare that we disagree on much which is why I always like discussing with you when we disagree (you have well thought out reasons and you don't get emotional/defensive). That being said, this is one that we definitely see differently, and I have to ask some follow up/clarifying questions. Specific areas I'm interested in hearing:
1. "Team Holyfield" not minding avoiding Tyson: I feel like the Duvas had a great reputation for matching that group of fighters (84 Olympians) tough- think about Sweet Pea Whitaker fighting McGirt and JCC, Meldrick Taylor fighting JCC and Terry Norris, and Evander fighting pretty much everyone and anyone from three generations of heavyweights (always fighting the toughest available competition). With the money they were set to make with the hype that surrounded Holyfield-Tyson, I think they were likely upset that the fight fell through. Again- it is one thing if we are talking PBC/Al Haymon since he has proven risk averse with outside/external fighters, but the Duvas consistently put their guys in with TOUGH competition.
2. It is all speculation, but Evander was pretty muscular when he beat Douglas and Foreman, and the truth is he was always a horrible style match up for Tyson. I don't see any version of Tyson ever beating any version of Evander. Holyfield's kryptonite was LARGE heavyweights with great jabs (Bowe and Lewis), or really slick boxers who didn't let him counter punch (Toney, Larry Donald, Chris Byrd). Put Ray Mercer, Mike Tyson, David Tua...etc. in front of him and he looked amazing.

The Holyfield that beat Douglas and Foreman was 208lb so was lighter than when he bulked up and faced Tyson after prison. Holyfield real weakness was he liked a war and it cost him against Bowe who was too big for him the first time. Cooper nearly knocked him out.

I think Tyson was nearer his peak and could have beaten Holyfield if they fought the first time. Tyson would destroy that body and thin waist before cracking that chin to stop him.

Crawford did a lot to make the fight happen, and I don't think that Errol Spence was unwilling to fight. Al Haymon killed that fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

Crawford did a lot to make the fight happen, and I don't think that Errol Spence was unwilling to fight. Al Haymon killed that fight.

---

I’ve never conversed with you on here, but you’re clearly the most knowledgeable guy about the “business end” of American boxing, so when you talk , I listen. Why do you think Haymon would scupper the fight?
Is it too risky for his fighter in his opinion?
I’m just intrigued because it’s pretty clear this is THE Money fight.

Let’s be very clear. We know for a fact Bud is lying

He said he accepted all the terms for a fight on February 23rd. The fact he accepted a different fight absolutely proves that is not true.

He also said he told Haymon and Spence that he was taking a fight this year, Espinoza says categorically that that is a lie. If you’re already lying why not add more lies?

Now. When you are assigning blame, what is a good way to start? One way is looking at who you know is lying. If the truth is on your side you don’t need to lie. We know Bud is lying so…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Let’s be very clear. We know for a fact Bud is lying

He said he accepted all the terms for a fight on February 23rd. The fact he accepted a different fight absolutely proves that is not true.

He also said he told Haymon and Spence that he was taking a fight this year, Espinoza says categorically that that is a lie. If you’re already lying why not add more lies?

Now. When you are assigning blame, what is a good way to start? One way is looking at who you know is lying. If the truth is on your side you don’t need to lie. We know Bud is lying so…

---

Don’t take this as me taking Crawford’s side, because I don’t know the ins and outs of these negotiations, but how do you know Espinoza isn’t lying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

We should boycott Spence and Crawford until they fight each other.

---

errol v bud might now get even more far away, if ever. jaron ennis & eimantas stanionis will be pushing mandatories soon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

Crawford did a lot to make the fight happen, and I don't think that Errol Spence was unwilling to fight. Al Haymon killed that fight.

---

I’ve never conversed with you on here, but you’re clearly the most knowledgeable guy about the “business end” of American boxing, so when you talk , I listen. Why do you think Haymon would scupper the fight?
Is it too risky for his fighter in his opinion?
I’m just intrigued because it’s pretty clear this is THE Money fight.

---

That is the opinion of people that I have talked to- Ron sees it a different way and probably many people do. I will say that many of the people I talk to have Top Rank ties and have known Crawford for years. The other people have GBP ties and their boss sued Al Haymon.
A common criticism of Al is that he has been over paying guys for so long that nobody on his team understands what a fight is really worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

Crawford did a lot to make the fight happen, and I don't think that Errol Spence was unwilling to fight. Al Haymon killed that fight.

---

I’ve never conversed with you on here, but you’re clearly the most knowledgeable guy about the “business end” of American boxing, so when you talk , I listen. Why do you think Haymon would scupper the fight?
Is it too risky for his fighter in his opinion?
I’m just intrigued because it’s pretty clear this is THE Money fight.

---

That is the opinion of people that I have talked to- Ron sees it a different way and probably many people do. I will say that many of the people I talk to have Top Rank ties and have known Crawford for years. The other people have GBP ties and their boss sued Al Haymon.
A common criticism of Al is that he has been over paying guys for so long that nobody on his team understands what a fight is really worth.

---

And this is kinda the problem with the “boxing is a business” mantra. You get businessmen from out of the sport come in and , dare I say it “overpay” Boxers.
Now I’m sure that will open up a whole lot of comments about Danger, short career, put yourself in their shoes etc. But a fight is worth what it is worth.
And now we have the same problem brewing as with Soccer, inflated earnings, different priorities, money going out of the sport,
You tubers latching on Etc. And the sport suffers.
I have total admiration and respect for EVERY SINGLE BOXER that gets between the ropes, and good luck to them, get what you can. I don’t have all the answers, but it isn’t right at the moment.

The inflating of the market by middle east/streaming sites has resulted in great matchups not happening which is a shame. Rightly money comes before legacy for a fighter but there must come a time where their competitive nature will want to prove they are the best in their division.

See? This is what I mean. As fans, not only do we exchange opinions on fighters and their fights. Nowadays we're forced to form opinions on who's fault it is, when a fight doesn't happen (or takes too long to happen). But in forming opinions about fighters and their fights we get to use our own eyes. We don't depend on "he said she said." On fight negotiations, and the "who's holding up the works" nebulous area, we depend on what is reported to us. Which is why I think a lot of our speculations are just that... speculations. Based on 3rd party reporting.

For this fight all I can do is say that IMO, Crawford will end up looking the worse of the two. For reasons I've stated over in the Crawford-Avanesyan thread. Crawford is the relative newcomer to the division. Crawford is the one who still needs a couple more elite names in the division before he can make legitimate claims as to his all-time ranking. Crawford is the one with the well-publicized struggles with his previous promoter.

If this fight never happens, Crawford's image stands the most to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

The inflating of the market by middle east/streaming sites has resulted in great matchups not happening which is a shame. Rightly money comes before legacy for a fighter but there must come a time where their competitive nature will want to prove they are the best in their division.

---

See this is the thing, I slightly disagree. Not so much disagree, but I feel, and history has proved it countless times in the past, that if you go for legacy, go for titles, the money comes anyway.
You make your name, Your “brand” if you like, then the money will come.
And I’ll venture to go further and people I’m sure will disagree, but I’ll give examples of where people would have been better off chasing legacy rather than money.
GGG - I firmly believe that if he carried on mopping up the MW division , even slowing down to 2 fights a year because of aging, he would have built his own price bracket and his purses would’ve continued to increase, rather than hang onto Canelo’s nut sack and wait years for the golden ticket, getting royally dicked about and tainting his legacy into the bargain. I reckon his earnings would’ve been no different.
Kell Brook - was going along nicely increasing his status and with it, his earning potential, but decided for a quick money grab , flying up in weight , and his career was never the same after.
If he had stayed at WW and fought the biggest fights at that division, his (and their) earnings potential would’ve increased anyway.
Ok, he made a pot of cash with Khan, but that’s a whole nother ridiculous story.
Conor Benn & Chris Eubank Jr. - I think time will tell exactly how much both of these have fucked up their careers for the money grab of all money grabs.
And let’s not forget , Eubank played hardball with the GGG negotiations , allowing Brook to step in. And all these years later, he’s no further down the line as who is the guy he is calling out for his preferred next fight ? Yep, GGG.
Spence/ Crawford - yes they will decent money whoever they fight next, but if they fought each other, not only would they have made an absolute stack, but guess what, guaranteed there would be rematch clauses and they would be able to do it all over again.
I believe we , as fans are way too accepting of the decisions that get made at the moment. Yeah we moan about the fights not getting made, but we still put our cash down for the matches we don’t want to see and the mismatches .
So like I’ve said before, ultimately it’s our fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

The inflating of the market by middle east/streaming sites has resulted in great matchups not happening which is a shame. Rightly money comes before legacy for a fighter but there must come a time where their competitive nature will want to prove they are the best in their division.

---

See this is the thing, I slightly disagree. Not so much disagree, but I feel, and history has proved it countless times in the past, that if you go for legacy, go for titles, the money comes anyway.
You make your name, Your “brand” if you like, then the money will come.
And I’ll venture to go further and people I’m sure will disagree, but I’ll give examples of where people would have been better off chasing legacy rather than money.
GGG - I firmly believe that if he carried on mopping up the MW division , even slowing down to 2 fights a year because of aging, he would have built his own price bracket and his purses would’ve continued to increase, rather than hang onto Canelo’s nut sack and wait years for the golden ticket, getting royally dicked about and tainting his legacy into the bargain. I reckon his earnings would’ve been no different.
Kell Brook - was going along nicely increasing his status and with it, his earning potential, but decided for a quick money grab , flying up in weight , and his career was never the same after.
If he had stayed at WW and fought the biggest fights at that division, his (and their) earnings potential would’ve increased anyway.
Ok, he made a pot of cash with Khan, but that’s a whole nother ridiculous story.
Conor Benn & Chris Eubank Jr. - I think time will tell exactly how much both of these have fucked up their careers for the money grab of all money grabs.
And let’s not forget , Eubank played hardball with the GGG negotiations , allowing Brook to step in. And all these years later, he’s no further down the line as who is the guy he is calling out for his preferred next fight ? Yep, GGG.
Spence/ Crawford - yes they will decent money whoever they fight next, but if they fought each other, not only would they have made an absolute stack, but guess what, guaranteed there would be rematch clauses and they would be able to do it all over again.
I believe we , as fans are way too accepting of the decisions that get made at the moment. Yeah we moan about the fights not getting made, but we still put our cash down for the matches we don’t want to see and the mismatches .
So like I’ve said before, ultimately it’s our fault.

---

You are right and in an ideal world legacy fights should follow money but injuries, dangerous contenders with low reward, and/or loss of form can get in the way.

It is a decision and risk that the fighter takes for his career and must live with for the rest of their lives.

Whyte turned down the offer to face AJ and went his own route. Ruiz went on to beat AJ, that could have been Whyte but he did not take the risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

The inflating of the market by middle east/streaming sites has resulted in great matchups not happening which is a shame. Rightly money comes before legacy for a fighter but there must come a time where their competitive nature will want to prove they are the best in their division.

---

See this is the thing, I slightly disagree. Not so much disagree, but I feel, and history has proved it countless times in the past, that if you go for legacy, go for titles, the money comes anyway.
You make your name, Your “brand” if you like, then the money will come.
And I’ll venture to go further and people I’m sure will disagree, but I’ll give examples of where people would have been better off chasing legacy rather than money.
GGG - I firmly believe that if he carried on mopping up the MW division , even slowing down to 2 fights a year because of aging, he would have built his own price bracket and his purses would’ve continued to increase, rather than hang onto Canelo’s nut sack and wait years for the golden ticket, getting royally dicked about and tainting his legacy into the bargain. I reckon his earnings would’ve been no different.
Kell Brook - was going along nicely increasing his status and with it, his earning potential, but decided for a quick money grab , flying up in weight , and his career was never the same after.
If he had stayed at WW and fought the biggest fights at that division, his (and their) earnings potential would’ve increased anyway.
Ok, he made a pot of cash with Khan, but that’s a whole nother ridiculous story.
Conor Benn & Chris Eubank Jr. - I think time will tell exactly how much both of these have fucked up their careers for the money grab of all money grabs.
And let’s not forget , Eubank played hardball with the GGG negotiations , allowing Brook to step in. And all these years later, he’s no further down the line as who is the guy he is calling out for his preferred next fight ? Yep, GGG.
Spence/ Crawford - yes they will decent money whoever they fight next, but if they fought each other, not only would they have made an absolute stack, but guess what, guaranteed there would be rematch clauses and they would be able to do it all over again.
I believe we , as fans are way too accepting of the decisions that get made at the moment. Yeah we moan about the fights not getting made, but we still put our cash down for the matches we don’t want to see and the mismatches .
So like I’ve said before, ultimately it’s our fault.

---

You are right and in an ideal world legacy fights should follow money but injuries, dangerous contenders with low reward, and/or loss of form can get in the way.

It is a decision and risk that the fighter takes for his career and must live with for the rest of their lives.

Whyte turned down the offer to face AJ and went his own route. Ruiz went on to beat AJ, that could have been Whyte but he did not take the risk.

---

Exactly that.

I spoke to a fighter that started with Golden Boy, and won a world title and made good money. He jumped to PBC and got paid stupid money to fight Ricky Burns.
In his mind signing with PBC killed his career because, in his opinion, he wasn't getting good fights to keep him interested and excited. You could make a case that all of a sudden having a bunch of money killed his discipline and derailed his career. Maybe it is the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

I spoke to a fighter that started with Golden Boy, and won a world title and made good money. He jumped to PBC and got paid stupid money to fight Ricky Burns.
In his mind signing with PBC killed his career because, in his opinion, he wasn't getting good fights to keep him interested and excited. You could make a case that all of a sudden having a bunch of money killed his discipline and derailed his career. Maybe it is the same thing.

---

This is what I mean about changing priorities. His priority was becoming a World Champion , then he got a load of dough thrown at him to drop the belt he’d worked so hard by going up in weight. Everything changed.

tyson fury v aj & terence crawford v errol spence were teased, instead tyson fury v dereck chisora & terence crawford v david avanesyan were made

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

I spoke to a fighter that started with Golden Boy, and won a world title and made good money. He jumped to PBC and got paid stupid money to fight Ricky Burns.
In his mind signing with PBC killed his career because, in his opinion, he wasn't getting good fights to keep him interested and excited. You could make a case that all of a sudden having a bunch of money killed his discipline and derailed his career. Maybe it is the same thing.

---

This is a great point. I feel like PBC/Al Haymon are the modern day version of Don King- with a slight twist (PBC doesn’t seem to rip off/steal from the fighters like King did). Don attempted to monopolize the sport by only letting his champs and big names fight boxers who signed contracts with him. PBC is doing the same- buy a stable of big name fighters and then add to that stable by only letting other PBC fighters challenge the big names. Where King was worse in terms of stealing from his fighters, he was better from the perspective of recognizing when it made sense to cross promotional boundaries and make big fights (Oscar vs Tito, Hop vs Tito…etc.).

The difference was that back then boxers fought for legacy and greatness- it was a different mindset. You see that mindset in some fighters today (Canelo, Loma, Fury, Usyk…etc.), but not to the level you did through the 2000s. Roy was the first fighter I remember who started talking risk/reward and approached boxing as business- with Floyd taking it to a whole other level later in his career. The difference was that both of those guys were legacy focused until later on in their careers, where many fighters today start out with a low risk/high reward and risk averse mentality.

Exactly! Start with prioritising legacy and titles , and the rest will follow in due course.

Each fighter has different levels of motivation and aspirations to go for legacy.

Boxers have a relatively small window of opportunity to make big money and is normally in the latter part of their career when age is setting in and have to use their experience to win fights.

Tyson Fury is interested in unifying the title and beating AJ for his legacy. After that he will retire he has all the money he needs and that is his motivation to continue boxing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Each fighter has different levels of motivation and aspirations to go for legacy.

Boxers have a relatively small window of opportunity to make big money and is normally in the latter part of their career when age is setting in and have to use their experience to win fights.

Tyson Fury is interested in unifying the title and beating AJ for his legacy. After that he will retire he has all the money he needs and that is his motivation to continue boxing.

---

No he fucking isn't! ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Each fighter has different levels of motivation and aspirations to go for legacy.

Boxers have a relatively small window of opportunity to make big money and is normally in the latter part of their career when age is setting in and have to use their experience to win fights.

Tyson Fury is interested in unifying the title and beating AJ for his legacy. After that he will retire he has all the money he needs and that is his motivation to continue boxing.

---

No he fucking isn't! ;D

---

I will bet with you that he will beat Chisora, Usyk and AJ in that order and retire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Each fighter has different levels of motivation and aspirations to go for legacy.

Boxers have a relatively small window of opportunity to make big money and is normally in the latter part of their career when age is setting in and have to use their experience to win fights.

Tyson Fury is interested in unifying the title and beating AJ for his legacy. After that he will retire he has all the money he needs and that is his motivation to continue boxing.

---

No he fucking isn't! ;D

---

I will bet with you that he will beat Chisora, Usyk and AJ in that order and retire.

---

I’ll take that bet. What’s on it ? Or just a sportsman’s bet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Primo Carnera

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Each fighter has different levels of motivation and aspirations to go for legacy.

Boxers have a relatively small window of opportunity to make big money and is normally in the latter part of their career when age is setting in and have to use their experience to win fights.

Tyson Fury is interested in unifying the title and beating AJ for his legacy. After that he will retire he has all the money he needs and that is his motivation to continue boxing.

---

No he fucking isn't! ;D

---

I will bet with you that he will beat Chisora, Usyk and AJ in that order and retire.

---

I’ll take that bet. What’s on it ? Or just a sportsman’s bet?

---

Anything you like.

Boxing promoter Eddie Hearn admits he is envious of the business model used by Dana White and the UFC.

The Matchroom Sports chairman has had a tough time as of late, as a massive fight between Chris Eubank Jr and Conor Benn fell through before talks for a British blockbuster with Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua collapsed.

Away from his stable of fighters, a much-discussed undisputed welterweight bout between Errol Spence and Terrence Crawford recently fell through when ‘Bud’ decided to take on David Avanesyan instead of continuing with drawn-out fight talks.

As the biggest fights in boxing consistently fail to get made, many combat sports fans are becoming engrossed in MMA which is led by the UFC who almost always puts on the fights fans want when they want them.

“The UFC is a tremendous business. I’m so jealous of the UFC because fighters come into the UFC, you sign a central contract, and the money is not great,” Hearn told talkSPORT Breakfast.

“You are basically told who you are going to fight, and you have no choice at all. The problem with boxing is, you have a choice. You have representatives, you have agents, you have managers, you have lawyers.

“[In the UFC] you can be in a fight that doesn’t really pay you the value of what you deserve for that fight. Sometimes fighters [boxers] are overpaid in terms of their value, in fact, it happens a lot.”

Hearn doesn’t want to make excuses for failing to make fights but also believes he faces many more obstacles when it comes to putting together big boxing bouts.

“I don’t wanna say it’s not our fault, but we are negotiating with fighters, lawyers, advisers to make fights happen,” he added.

“You have to understand, for me, all I wanna do is make the biggest fights for myself, the fans, the broadcasters and make as much money as possible as a business. I don’t mind saying that.”

Hearn will look to get his 2022 back on track this weekend at Wembley Arena with a card that features undisputed lightweight champion Katie Taylor defending her belts against undefeated Argentine Elizabeth Carabajal.

However, fans wanted to see ‘The Bray Bomber’ in a rematch with Amanda Serrano that would ideally take place at Croke Park in Dublin.

https://talksport.com/sport/boxing/1...nthony-joshua/

I think a Serrano-Taylor rematch should happen in Las Vegas. It would pack the house as the main event.

i just try to focus on the good fights that are being made, those are the fighters who should be getting threads with replies

Eddie is so full of shat sometimes that he's practically floating over the rim of the bowl. At the moment he's suing Serranos "promoter" right? Pretty much will put that rematch in the dust bin. They had big fights in their lap but piddled multi millions on Andrade keeping a strap warm and more millions to Mikey to comb his hair. I get the extreme cases and diva attitudes called out, but anytime I hear a company mouthpiece say "the problem is boxers have choices" I don't think bad. I think Don King ;D. Ufc is just edging 30 years on and doing well at picking up some of boxings black eyes but at a more rapid pace. Weekly shouts of robbery and bad officiating, over blown ppvs, the "next" major star blowing weight and being rewarded for it. Hearn needs to center on his own house and cut the nonsense.

Ennis vs Norman Jr unification

Hearn say 3 offers have been made & Norman's father still wants more. Norman have not even headlined yet. Ennis is sell big crowd at Philadelphia. Norman is outpricing self. Bring Chukhadzhian to Ennis hometown for mandatory instead