Quote Originally Posted by ono
Quote Originally Posted by miles
Quote Originally Posted by Poom
The root of the problem is just all the governing bodies, if a belt actually meant being the best and getting to fight the best challengers then boxers would actually want to fight for and defend them
But the point is that it is Hattons fault if a mandatory is known of prior to fighting Urango...the authorities are the issue if its decided after the Urango fight has been sealed.

Either way a Castillo fight could have been on the cards without this Urango fight...
I'm only guessing that he didn't know he only had 90 days to defend it. He might have presumed he had a year like i did. That way to Castillo clash would have been for the belt?
Of course he knew, we all knew before he fought Urango that the winner had a mandatory to fight the winner of Rabah N'Dou.

People complain about the belts being worthless and that very well may be the case, but if fighters actually respected them a bit more then maybe they would be worth more.

Most of us can see regarding Sam Peter that it's unfair for them to oust him from his mandatory status in order to give Vitali first dibs.

Well it's the same at unfair for N Dou for Hatton to deny him his chance.

Why fight Urango just to throw the title away immediately after leaving the IBF without a champion for the second time in 2 years