Comments Thread For: Golovkin-Jacobs: WBA Denies Request To Modify Purse Bid Split

[mapleleaf27]

Like I said yesterday, almost 14000 posts in less then 2 years? Get a life man.

[aboutfkntime]

.....I suppose I should not judge the overall ******ity of an entire country based on one internet poster

Like I said yesterday, almost 14000 posts in less then 2 years? Get a life man.

[Scipio2009]

This is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. This is a lie... Complete and total lie.

Daniel Jacobs has been positioned as a coming mandatory challenger for at least a year and a half now; how many times in that period did you ever hear Golovkin, Abel Sanchez, or Tom Loeffler ever say that they wanted to fight Daniel Jacobs?

You'll hear chirping about Floyd, Cotto, Canelo (and arguably Pacquiao if they thought they could sell the boxing press on the fight), yet you never heard about Daniel Jacobs until the WBA finally mandated the fight.

[Scipio2009]

One of the ways the fight doesn't happen is if Team Jacobs wins the bid and puts the fight on Showtime. GGG vacates instead of violating his deal with HBO. (Think of Kovalev dropping out of purse bid with Adonis). The 75/25 split almost guarantees that Team Jacobs does not win the purse bid – why bid a massive amount to pay the other guy the lion's share? I know Haymon bid $5M for Deontay/Povetkin, but that was not a 25% split for Deontay.

My understanding is that Jacobs can fight on HBO, so he can fight if Team GGG wins the bid or if the two sides make a deal.

DiBella/Haymon don't have to bid a massive amount; they simply have to bid more that K2 (or any other promoter) is willing to bid; once you control the event, you have ownership of any and all upsides on the fight.

What is the fight worth to K2 (MSG, HBO, supported by whatever K2 can bring to the table) versus what is the fight worth to DiBella (Barclays Center, Showtime, supported with meaningful fights for a NYC-centered audience)?

If giving up 75% of a flat amount is the cost of doing business, I don't see DiBella/Haymon having any issue with it.

[BattlingNelson]

1) Jacobs said they low-balled him
2) K2 requested an early purse-bid
3) the WBA ignored their request, and did the exact opposite by extending the deadline. Why do you think they did that, genius?

Get real, K2 are notoriously difficult to negotiate with, it is clearly obvious whats up.

That timeline is so full of holes because the missing parts does not fit your agenda.

1. WBA sets a timeline for volontary negotiations.
2. Jacobs asks for an interim fight
3. WBA denies interim fight
4. Jacobs asks for a rules change regarding pursesplit
5. GGG says the negotiations isnt progressing and asks for the pursebids to be moved forward
6. WBA denies Jacobs request and Will not change their rules
7. WBA decides to extend the period of volontary negotiations.

[1nonlymre]

The denial of the purse split sounds right to me. In an ideal world and situation, Jacob’s belt would be automatically dissolved and his title would be immediately relinquished upon completion of either negotiations or a purse bid. Why? Because this fight is being touted as a means to consolidate both the super and regular titles, with only the super being left over (if that’s what the WBA continues to call it). With that in mind, I feel that Jacobs holds nothing of value to Golovkin in terms of belts other than being a true mandatory.
What is troubling is all the boxer accounting talk that is going on about fighters and how much they should be receiving. I doubt any casual watcher ever received one penny from the 400 million pot of gold that funded the May/Pac sparring match. Yet a year+ later we are still having similar arguments about money when that really means less than nothing to us as viewers.
I see Jacobs as a #1 contender. And that puts him in line to fight the champion. And if we must speak money language. I am of the belief that the champion is the money-maker. OR at least, that’s how it should work. As such, any #1 contender puts themselves in a position to firstly fight for the championship, and secondly, to fight for a chance to make significantly more money from that point forward. The problem is that this type of thinking tends to be seen in reverse. The norm today is that the fighter should make big money first, then fight for the championship. And to me, that just seems incorrect. I feel a fighter should be content with just about any amount he is offered to fight the champion. So long as that amount is reasonable, and by that I mean, in accordance to at least the bare minimum of a purse split amount or more. The bigger goal is getting the titles from the champion. In this particular matchup, Golovkin holds all the gold and should not bend to Jacobs in any way in terms of split. And I would feel the same way if Jacobs beats Golovkin and requests a higher percentage in the rematch. He would have earned that request at that point by having beaten the champion and now being on top of the hill.
So now the questions:
If Jacobs doesn’t get an amount of money that he feels he should have, should he vacate?
A short answer, no. But not to keep the title. But rather, he would not be vacating by default. I say this because I think his title should not exist now that the WBA is consolidating their regular and super titles. His belt is worthless. If he bows out of this fight due to any sour g****s, he leaves with no title, and with a drop in the rankings. That’s how I feel this should be handled.
If Golovkin loses the purse bid, should he vacate?
It would be ****** if he did. And he would be the biggest hypocrite out there. If his goals are to indeed become undisputed champion of the middleweight division, at no time should he ever vacate a title. He would lose leverage, and would only make a potential matchup with Jacobs that much more difficult to negotiate later on down the line. This type of move would almost seem too similar to what Alvarez did to the WBC belt.
What, exactly, is this fight for?
It really is nothing more than a mandatory defense against the #1 contender and mandatory in the WBA. Jacobs has no title to lose (in my opinion) and Golovkin has little to gain with this fight.
Should the fight still happen then?
Absolutely! How else could you definitively propose the question of who is better between the two, and that’s how it should play out as well. The champion must fight his mandatory as that person should have earned the right to fight the champion.
And finally, should the money split matter?
So long as the split does not get negotiated below the purse big amounts? NO. Remember, prior to this fight, anyone fighting Jacobs was fighting for the #1 contender spot. Jacobs was the top dog in that negotiation. Here, he is the #1 contender fighting for the rightful champion, and no longer is the top dog. The sooner he understands this, the sooner this fight will happen.

[Eastcoast]

Sounds like team Jacobs will vacate if it goes to purse bid.

FIGHT NEWS BY NYF Update On Gennady Golovkin-Danny Jacobs Talks By Michael Woods
onOctober 14, 2016 SHARE TWEET SHARE SHARE

The WBA ruled that their standard slicing of the pie for a purse bid, a 75-25% split in favor of the champ, will stand. So where does that leave the GGG VS Danny Jacobs proposed tussle?

Jacobs wanted a sweeter split, being that he holds the WBA regular middleweight crown. Golovkin holds the WBA’s XXL version. The WBA didn’t see the logic of the Brooklyn boxer. So, is this thing off the rails? We know that the WBA gave all parties till Oct 22 to hash out a deal.

I reached out to reps for both teams. Promoter Tom Loeffler said negotiations continue. And Andre Rozier, Jacobs’ trainer, said the same.

Ok, that’s promising, right? I hope so, speaking as a fan.

Rozier told me he really doesn’t feel the WBA not comprehending that his guy deserves a better split than one that would be afforded a non champion. He thinks the sanctioning body getting a taste of two belt purses is a “scam” and said “it should be even Steven or at least 60-40.”

So, he said, he’s optimistic, being an “eternal optimist,” that makes sense, that Loeffler and Al Haymon can come to terms before Oct 22. Because, Rozier said, he can picture the wheels off the wagon if a purse bid is forced. “If it goes to bid then I think it falls apart.” But “these guys need each other for a big fight,” he noted.

I really hope the WBA doesn't mandate Golovkin/Blanco. I'd rather see a deal where Golovkin fights Quillin or Anthony Dirrell or Lara and Jacobs fights Blanco as the co-main and they use that to build a ppv for March '17. They could agree to have one fight in MSG and the other in Barclay.

[NEETzsche]

I would think Jacobs could get atleast 65/35 simply by agreeing to fight on HBO and in MSG. We don't know the details, but I don't think the split is as much the issue as Danny's minimum guarantee. If Danny's asking for atleast $3mill, that's probably going to kill this fight regardless of the split.

yeah, considering that it won't be PPV, $3m is probably roughly the amount that both golovkin and jacobs would be expected to share

if jacobs wants that much or more all for himself, the fight is literally unmakeable

[Derranged]

Daniel Jacobs has been positioned as a coming mandatory challenger for at least a year and a half now; how many times in that period did you ever hear Golovkin, Abel Sanchez, or Tom Loeffler ever say that they wanted to fight Daniel Jacobs?

You'll hear chirping about Floyd, Cotto, Canelo (and arguably Pacquiao if they thought they could sell the boxing press on the fight), yet you never heard about Daniel Jacobs until the WBA finally mandated the fight.

Half a year ago Jacobs said he wanted Golovkin in a year and a half. He didn't start screaming for the fight until he saw Golovkin didn't look so great against Brook.

[Eastcoast]

yeah, considering that it won't be PPV, $3m is probably roughly the amount that both golovkin and jacobs would be expected to share

if jacobs wants that much or more all for himself, the fight is literally unmakeable

Jacob's trainer just said if it goes to purse bid, it falls apart.

So make a deal where Haymon agrees to give Golovkin a fight with Lara or Quillin for a reasonable price and have Danny fight Blanco on the undercard, with an agreement in place that the winners fight in March on ppv.

I hope K2 recognizes - Golovkin/Blanco is a setback.