Worst Boxing Org/Sanctioning Body of 2015?

[LoadedWraps]

Nobody in this thread has been able to counter the following:

"THE IBF HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO STRIP TYSON FURY."

Lots of whining. Lots of moaning. Lots of trolling. But nobody has explained what alternative there was for the IBF.

Because there was no alternative.

All About Time has done is post falsehood after falsehood while Loaded Wraps waves the pom poms.

Meanwhile, neither one of them has told us what option the IBF had.

About Time's latest post manages to cram numerous false claims into one sentence. Very impressive.

First, he claims that the IBF installed Martin as champion. 100% untrue. He was not awarded the title. Glazkov was ranked #1. #2 was vacant. Klitschko was #3 and could have fought Glazkov for the vacant title, but turned it down. Martin was #4 and accepted the fight.

He won the title fair and square by TKO against the #1 contender. He is the rightful champion. He was not installed as anything or awarded anything. If About Time believes the IBF title is a 2nd rate title and that Martin is a 2nd rate champion, that's fine. Nobody is arguing otherwise. However, that does not give About Time the right to post blatant lies.

Second, he claims Martin was an unknown prospect. 100% untrue. Perhaps unknown to About Time since he doesn't closely follow boxing, but Martin had been North American champion for years and had earned the #1 ranking and mandatory position in the WBO.

He'd fought recently on a nationally televised NBC sports PBC broadcast as well. Was he the biggest name in the division? Of course not. Was he unknown? Not to fans that closely follow the sport.

So the problem here isn't what the IBF did (they had no choice). The problem is that About Time doesn't know anything about boxing.

The alternative was respect the rematch clause and give Fury more time to make a defense.

[aboutfkntime]

Nobody in this thread has been able to counter the following:

"THE IBF HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO STRIP TYSON FURY."

Lots of whining. Lots of moaning. Lots of trolling. But nobody has explained what alternative there was for the IBF.

Because there was no alternative.

All About Time has done is post falsehood after falsehood while Loaded Wraps waves the pom poms.

Meanwhile, neither one of them has told us what option the IBF had.

About Time's latest post manages to cram numerous false claims into one sentence. Very impressive.

First, he claims that the IBF installed Martin as champion. 100% untrue. He was not awarded the title. Glazkov was ranked #1. #2 was vacant. Klitschko was #3 and could have fought Glazkov for the vacant title, but turned it down. Martin was #4 and accepted the fight.

He won the title fair and square by TKO against the #1 contender. He is the rightful champion. He was not installed as anything or awarded anything. If About Time believes the IBF title is a 2nd rate title and that Martin is a 2nd rate champion, that's fine. Nobody is arguing otherwise. However, that does not give About Time the right to post blatant lies.

Second, he claims Martin was an unknown prospect. 100% untrue. Perhaps unknown to About Time since he doesn't closely follow boxing, but Martin had been North American champion for years and had earned the #1 ranking and mandatory position in the WBO.

He'd fought recently on a nationally televised NBC sports PBC broadcast as well. Was he the biggest name in the division? Of course not. Was he unknown? Not to fans that closely follow the sport.

So the problem here isn't what the IBF did (they had no choice). The problem is that About Time doesn't know anything about boxing.

That statement has been countered NUMEROUS times, with common-sense.

But you then proceed to over-rule common-sense with " rules doe ".

Rules, that are clearly absurd....... unless you really think that Charles Martin is the best heavyweight on the planet?

We have no idea why/how you could do that.

NOBODY agree's with you, because NOBODY thinks that Charles Martin is the best heavyweight on the planet..... except for you, and the IBF

OBVIOUSLY, and I will say it again, because you ain't the sharpest.....
OBVIOUSLY, they should have given Fury time to honor his "obligations" to Glazkov..... did I use the word "OBVIOUSLY" enough times to make my point?

When the IBF ignored the fact that Fury had just upset the long-standing heavyweight kingpin Klitschko..... it was more than remiss, it was totally inept/incompetent...... as the landscape at heavyweight had completely changed.

They gave Martin 12 months to honor his obligations for this reason.....
" he won the fight, let him enjoy his title " ~ Daryl Peoples

Which is EXACTLY what Fury did !

Again, why is it obvious to everyone, except you ?

Keep flogging that dead horse.

#rulesdoe

[aboutfkntime]

The alternative was respect the rematch clause and give Fury more time to make a defense.

EXACTLY !!

Stripping Fury within 5 minutes was utterly ******ed and unjustifiable.

[original zero]

Loaded Wraps -

A "rematch clause" is merely agreeing in advance to a VOLUNTARY DEFENSE. Klitschko & Fury both knew the IBF mandatory was *overdue* and promised that the winner would fight Glazkov next.

They made that promise with no intention of keeping it and tricked the IBF into sanctioning their fight.

Then, they hid the rematch clause from the IBF and did not list it in the version of the contract presented to the IBF.

Klitschko & Fury both knew the IBF belt would be stripped in the event that Fury won because they were VOLUNTARILY agreeing to a VOLUNTARY DEFENSE despite the fact that the mandatory was overdue before their *first fight* even took place.

The IBF *gave extra time* by allowing Klischko to defend against Fury in the first place!

Granting an additional VOLUNTARY defense was not a legitimate alternative as Glazkov would have sued and had an open and shut case. Which is why the IBF had no choice. There was absolutely nothing that would allow them to grant another VOLUNTARY defense without Glazkov easily and successfully suing them for millions of dollars.

So please explain how the IBF would have been able to "respect the rematch clause and give Fury more time to make a defense" without Glazkov dominating them in court and possibly putting them out of business?



About Time -

Your idea of "common sense" takes place in an alternate reality you've created for yourself. What you present as "common sense" is only applicable if we ignore all of the facts.

You've failed to explain why it is "clearly absurd" that the IBF champion must face the #1 contender once a year. Klitschko was only IBF champion to begin with because he became the #1 contender and received his title shot as the mandatory. If the rule is "clearly absurd," Klitschko may never have been champion in the first place.

Even if the rule is "clearly absurd," it doesn't change the fact that the IBF had no choice but to strip Tyson Fury because Glazkov still paid his sanctioning fee for the eliminator, won the eliminator, and the IBF had a legal obligation to enforce their rules, regardless of whether you believe they are absurd. The IBF would have been sunk in court if they blatantly violated the rules to grant Fury a voluntary defense when the mandatory was overdue before he ever won the title.

It doesn't matter who the best heavyweight is on the planet. You've said over and over that the IBF is a 2nd rate org, so why would you expect them to have a 1st rate champ?

Please show me where the IBF said that Charles Martin is the best heavyweight on the planet. He is the champion of the IBF, not the champion of the planet. The best fighters don't fight for the IBF because the IBF enforces their rules, so why would you expect the IBF champion to be the best fighter?

You say the IBF obviously should have given Fury more time, but on what basis? Glazkov had a legally binding contract. The IBF would have ended up in court and lost badly. Your scenarios are taking place in a fantasy world. I'm explaining to you the realities of the situation. You're free to imagine whatever you want in munchkin land, but the IBF can't just ignore their rules and ignore the law.

Please explain on what basis they could have granted Fury additional time without losing a gigantic lawsuit and possibly going out of business.

The IBF didn't ignore that Fury had just upset the long standing champion. They recognized Fury as the new champion and ranked the old champion at #3, the absolute highest ranking allowed by their rules since you have to win an eliminator to be ranked #1 or #2. You believe a longtime champion deserves an automatic rematch, but boxing has never worked like that and you shouldn't have to beat to beat a champion twice in a row to be the champion.

Fury did NOT do exactly what Martin did. This has been explained many times. You continue to ignore this point because you choose to live in some bizarre alternate universe.

MANDATORY IS DUE ONCE A YEAR.

CHARLES MARTIN BEAT THE MANDATORY, THEREFORE THE NEXT MANDATORY IS DUE A YEAR LATER.

IF FURY HAD BEAT THE MANDATORY, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN 12 MONTHS AS WELL.

This is very very simple stuff.

You can write "rules doe" over and over. And might as well right "laws doe" and "contracts doe" and "courts doe" and "lawsuits doe" and "multimillion dollar judgments doe" and "bankruptcy doe" while you're at it.

A company can't ignore all of these things just because you write "doe" at the end of them.

[LoadedWraps]

Then the IBF should eat the fines in court for the sake of a greater good; the unification of the titles.

Just because something is "legal" doesn't mean it can't also be scandolously disgraceful or unethical. The IBF knew full well how it was going to play out, and it's pathetic.

[original zero]

But it's not the IBF's fault that the titles aren't unified. It's Klitschko & Fury's fault.

The IBF made an exception and granted Klitschko a VOLUNTARY defense against Fury because they both promised that the winner would face Glazkov next. They lied to the IBF, which was disgraceful and unethical.

When they submitted the contract to the IBF, they hid the rematch clause from the IBF, which was disgraceful and unethical.

They tricked the IBF into sanctioning their first fight, which was disgraceful and unethical.

If you believe that the titles remaining unified is the "greater good" and that financial sacrifice should be made for the "greater good," then Fury should have, for the sake of the greater good, refused to agree to a rematch clause and fought Glazkov for the sake of the greater good; the unification of the titles.

Whatever Fury was paid for the rematch clause is peanuts compared to what the IBF could lose in court if they violated Glazkov's rights. The WBC lost a lawsuit for blatantly violating a fighter's rights and was ordered to pay $30 million, which nearly caused the organization to cease to exist.

And you expected the IBF to put themselves in a similar position because Klitschko & Fury lied to them, tricked them and hid a rematch clause from them?

Why exactly should the IBF have screwed over Glazkov and risked ruining their entire organization just to grant ANOTHER *voluntary* defense when the mandatory was overdue?

There is NOTHING unethical about what the IBF did. In fact, you are whining and moaning because they DID act ethically.

The entire crux of your argument is that you're pissed that the IBF didn't act unethically. You're literally crying because the IBF did the right thing and showed honor and ethics.

If they were going to act unethically, why wouldn't they sanction the fight that was going to make them the most money?!?

Your argument doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

[aboutfkntime]

About Time -

Your idea of "common sense" takes place in an alternate reality you've created for yourself.

The only alternate reality is the IBF stripping the lineal - and GENUINE - heavyweight champion, simply because they would not give him adequate time to fight their bum.


They were incompetent, and arrogant, when they ranked Glazkov ahead of Klitschko..... they only had to wait, that bum could have been Fury'd next.

What you present as "common sense" is only applicable if we ignore all of the facts.

What facts? Like the keyword..... " genuine ", in my comment above ?

Or the word I used to describe their champion ?

Use some common-sense man, wtf is wrong with you ?

You've failed to explain why it is "clearly absurd" that the IBF champion must face the #1 contender once a year.

I explained it crystal clear, and once again I explained it for you above.

The keywords were bolded, especially for you.

It doesn't matter who the best heavyweight is on the planet. You've said over and over that the IBF is a 2nd rate org, so why would you expect them to have a 1st rate champ?

Please show me where the IBF said that Charles Martin is the best heavyweight on the planet. He is the champion of the IBF, not the champion of the planet. The best fighters don't fight for the IBF because the IBF enforces their rules, so why would you expect the IBF champion to be the best fighter?

That is the only sense you have made in this thread.

I agree with you, the IBF are second-rate, and inept.

Now the heavyweight division is even more fragmented, and now the IBF have installed an untested prospect as champion.

Let the ******ity continue.

You say the IBF obviously should have given Fury more time, but on what basis? Glazkov had a legally binding contract. The IBF would have ended up in court and lost badly. Your scenarios are taking place in a fantasy world. I'm explaining to you the realities of the situation. You're free to imagine whatever you want in munchkin land, but the IBF can't just ignore their rules and ignore the law.

Please explain on what basis they could have granted Fury additional time without losing a gigantic lawsuit and possibly going out of business.

The IBF didn't ignore that Fury had just upset the long standing champion. They recognized Fury as the new champion and ranked the old champion at #3, the absolute highest ranking allowed by their rules since you have to win an eliminator to be ranked #1 or #2. You believe a longtime champion deserves an automatic rematch, but boxing has never worked like that and you shouldn't have to beat to beat a champion twice in a row to be the champion.

Fury did NOT do exactly what Martin did. This has been explained many times. You continue to ignore this point because you choose to live in some bizarre alternate universe.

MANDATORY IS DUE ONCE A YEAR.

CHARLES MARTIN BEAT THE MANDATORY, THEREFORE THE NEXT MANDATORY IS DUE A YEAR LATER.

IF FURY HAD BEAT THE MANDATORY, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN 12 MONTHS AS WELL.

This is very very simple stuff.

You can write "rules doe" over and over. And might as well right "laws doe" and "contracts doe" and "courts doe" and "lawsuits doe" and "multimillion dollar judgments doe" and "bankruptcy doe" while you're at it.

A company can't ignore all of these things just because you write "doe" at the end of them.

On the basis of common-sense, you silly kid

You are an absolute idiot, I will just leave it there.

[original zero]

Klitschko & Fury agreed to face Glazkov next, so they were given adequate time and allowed to fight each other.

But they lied to the IBF and then tricked the IBF by hiding their rematch clause. They left the IBF with no choice.

You say the IBF "only had to wait," but Glazkov's position was binding and he would have sought a court injunction. You can write "rules doe" all you want, but this scenario was taking place in reality, not your fantasy land. So laws, rules, contracts, agreements and rights can't be dismissed by writing "doe."

You've lied again by claiming Martin was installed as champion. 100% false. He was not awarded anything. He was the highest AVAILABLE contender and agreed to face the mandatory.

He beat the mandatory fair & square. Therefore, he is the champion of the IBF. An org you believe is 2nd rate, so you shouldn't even care who their champion is. Which makes your position wildly inconsistent.

You keep calling me a kid, but I'm the only one presenting a logical argument. I'm a grown man with nearly 20 years experience in the combat sports industry. This is how I make my living. I can't just write "doe" and ignore all facts, logic and reason

I live in the real world. You live in a fantasy land. Time and time again, I calmly explain why your positions are faulty, which is why you continue to throw temper tantrums and hurl insults.

If you believe I am an idiot: prove it. You can't. There is nothing in the rules or in the law that would have allowed the IBF to do what you're suggesting.

Had the IBF followed your advice, US courts would have spanked them hard. You continue to advocate a course of action that the IBF had no way of carrying out.

But maybe is you write "doe" enough times we can pretend that laws, rules, courts, contracts, agreements, rights, lawsuits, etc don't exist.

[Teddy05]

I think I might have to change my vote to the WBO. In what universe are Joseph Parker and Anthony Joshua the number 1 and 2 contenders to the world title. Having 2 guys with no top 30 names on their resumes ahead of Wladimir Klitschko and Alexander Povetkin?

Povetkin has beaten Charr, Takam, Perez and Wach all by KO and he's only ranked 4th??

This is a joke

[original zero]

the orgs rank the guys interested in fighting for their org.

povetkin is the WBC mandatory, so why would the WBO give him a high ranking?

klitschko just lost and made no effort whatsoever to try to win. how high do you want him ranked?