Can someone explain to me why wilder is allowed to get away with ducking whyte?

[Ray*]

Why though? There was no need to make Fury mandatory. It was to prevent a mandatory being called this year.

How many times did Fury told the WBC to fuck with their mandatory? That he isn't one to be subjected to a mandatory!!! They named him to block Whyte, the drug test thing was perfect for them to use it also.

[ShaneMosleySr]

How is it ducking when he’s not a mandatory and Wilder is fighting more deserving guys like Tyson Fury?

This would be like saying “why is Joshua allowed to duck Ortiz and kownacki.”

If the WBC orders the fight and Wilder refuses, then he’s ducking. Until that happens who cares? Whyte is just another random heavyweight who isn’t that good. Wilder is about to fight Fury for a second time.

[Phenom]

Why though? There was no need to make Fury mandatory. It was to prevent a mandatory being called this year.

So you're saying WBC tried to protect Wilder from Whyte by calling the #2 or #1 Tyson Fury as the mandatory

Do you read the sh11t you type before you type it? Or are your dumbass actually trying to argue Whyte who lost to 9 loss Chisora being better than Tyson Fury?

[Robbie Barrett]

There's no need to be disrespectful. I haven't insulted you, so please treat me with the same dignity and respect.

Hearn told Fight Hub in a video posted on Tuesday that he wants Wilder, who holds one of the heavyweight belts, to fight Dillian Whyte. Then, that winner would move on to fight Joshua

Then, if Wilder (38-0, 37 KOs) were to beat Whyte (21-1, 16 KOs), who was knocked out by Joshua in December 2015, he could face Joshua

Assuming Wilder gets by Stiverne, Hearn wants him in against Whyte.

...maybe your interpretation is different, but when I read those, I read conditional statements. I'm old, and I haven't done any computer programming in decades, but when I did, we used if-then statements. If the "if" was never satisfied, then the "then" would never occur. My reading is that the first "if" for Wilder is beating Stiverne, with the "then" being a Whyte fight. Subsequently beating Whyte is then the "if", which needs to be satisfied before the "then", being a fight with AJ, can occur.

If Wilder>Stiverne, then Wilder+Whyte.

If Wilder>Whyte, then Wilder+AJ.

That's how I read this.

A computer program has nothing to do with the English language. Wilder can't press Ctrl-alt-delete and make Whyte go away.

[Ray*]

How is it ducking when he’s not a mandatory and Wilder is fighting more deserving guys like Tyson Fury?

Fury wasn't in the equation when those ducks happened. Just trying to correct you there.

Those offers were pre-tyson fury, but a duck is a duck, he was offered money that represents his highest paydays on both occassions.

[Robbie Barrett]

How is it ducking when he’s not a mandatory and Wilder is fighting more deserving guys like Tyson Fury?

This would be like saying “why is Joshua allowed to duck Ortiz and kownacki.”

If the WBC orders the fight and Wilder refuses, then he’s ducking. Until that happens who cares? Whyte is just another random heavyweight who isn’t that good. Wilder is about to fight Fury for a second time.

Fury isn't even more deserving. Whyte has done far more to earn a shot than Fury has. Fury has fought nothing but bums since being out for 2 years.

[Robbie Barrett]

So you're saying WBC tried to protect Wilder from Whyte by calling the #2 or #1 Tyson Fury as the mandatory

Do you read the sh11t you type before you type it? Or are your dumbass actually trying to argue Whyte who lost to 9 loss Chisora being better than Tyson Fury?

Whyte was/is ranked higher than Fury in the WBC rankings imbecile. The Wilder/Fury fight was already going ahead. There was no reason to make Fury mandatory.

[El_Mero]

I'm not a particular fan of any of these heavies, especially Wilder, but I dont think he's ducking Whyte. I believe Whyte didnt do what was asked of him in regards to becoming Wilder's mandatory. I remember Sulaiman coming out awhile back and stating why Brezeale was getting the shot before Whyte. And although I didnt buy the reasoning, it was the ruling of the governing body. Then you have Whyte and the ped issue which just barely got sorted out.

I still cant get the whole 2 more fights with Fury taking precedent over whyte though, that, is what i dont understand.

[DaNeutral.]

He is allowed because Boxing is a lawless sport. Everybody can literally see the WBC and the PBC running shady business. We see it cuz they only bother to faintly veil things in a BS story cuz like i said, its lawless, there is nobody to control them, pull them up, make them do things properly. Somebody at the PBC does not want certain fighters facing Deontay Wilder and so thats what happens.

[GGG Gloveking]

That is the exact angle that Hearn spoke about, everyone and their mother knew Wilder would beat Bermane.

The offer was fight your number 1 guy at HW (WBC's ranked Whyte in the UK - If i remember correctly).

Joshua/Parker was already locked in for March 2018.

The winner then face off (Obviously if Wilder and Joshua wins), Parker win or lose has a one fight compensation from Matchroom (Which he used against Whyte).

So nothing wrong with Hearn creating the pathway for us fans to witness the Undisputed HW championship for the end of 2018.

No where did he try to use Whyte (Who was his own man) and ranked number 1 by the WBC as a roadblock for the undisputed.

He offered Wilder TWO highest payday, Wilder ducked both and went on to fight Ortiz for 2.1M....Those are the facts NOT twisted logic that you tried to make out...

I feel like you're lying to me on two things. Firstly, I found an article from November 2017, which has the WBC rankings. Stiverne was 1, Ortiz was 2, Pulev was 3, and Whyte was 4.



Secondly, you say that the Parker fight was already signed when the article I provided (October 2017) was published. I found this on Wiki. (I know, you're going to try to discredit the source without actually refuting it)

According to a Tweet from Parker on 15 November 2017, he was offered less than half of what was paid to Charles Martin when he defended his IBF title against Joshua.[5] The next day, Higgins told Fairfax Media that he and Hearn were still negotiating a deal that would benefit all parties.[6] Parker stated he was willing to drop to 35% of the net profit. Higgins made a final offer to Hearn on 22 November 2017. He told Sky Sports, "It's our final bottom line decision. We feel anything less is disrespectful or a disgrace."[7] On 29 November 2017, Hearn stated the fight could be confirmed within two weeks



So, at this point, your story sounds like, "Eddie wanted a tournament (even though one of the fights had not been signed) involving #1 (actually #4) ranked Dillian Whyte. And Eddie was making promises concerning a fighter who was not signed to him at the time."