Comments Thread For: Parker's Manager Could See Usyk Clash For Vacant WBO Title

[N/A]

They don't even need to do this though, right? Typically there's a rotation.

now, yes.

but for most of the wbo's history, it was an unrecognized, unwanted title. when bowe was champion, holyfield refused to fight for it because he didn't want to lose his rankings with the big 3. so bowe gave up the belt to fight holyfield.

when sanders was wbo champion, he gave up the belt to fight for the vacant wbc.

it's simple economics. and it's amplified at heavyweight. a wbo belt just isnt worth as much as the other belts.

[famicommander]

Anyone wanna explain why ***** coward Joshua is dropping the belt?


EDIT - Nevermind. Here's the reason ""You could end up with a situation where you have Usyk fight Parker for the vacant title, which funnily enough is how Joseph became world champion. He fought [Andy] Ruiz for the vacant title. History repeats. Usyk is a very tough fight. He's a southpaw, he would dissect Anthony Joshua."

I am a vocal critic of Joshua, but in this case it makes sense.

He will likely have to drop either the IBF or the WBO belt regardless.

If he drops the WBO, the vacant spot will be filled by either Usyk vs Parker or Usyk vs Chisora. In either case, Joshua vs the winner is a relatively easy fight to make to re-unify.

But if he vacates the IBF instead? Then the belt could end up at Top Rank or PBC, and Pulev or Kownacki would be far more likely to unify with the winner of Wilder vs Fury II than Joshua.

[famicommander]

They don't even need to do this though, right? Typically there's a rotation.

The rotation is screwed up because the IBF doesn't account for rematch clauses.

It's supposed to be the WBO's "turn", but because the WBO didn't enforce their mandatory after the first Ruiz vs Joshua fight, the IBF considers the WBO's turn "skipped" and is enforcing their own mandatory at the same time that the WBO is enforcing theirs.

[Mammoth]

The rotation is screwed up because the IBF doesn't account for rematch clauses.

It's supposed to be the WBO's "turn", but because the WBO didn't enforce their mandatory after the first Ruiz vs Joshua fight, the IBF considers the WBO's turn "skipped" and is enforcing their own mandatory at the same time that the WBO is enforcing theirs.

Povetkin was a WBA and WBO mandatory. An IBF mando hasn't been done since the Takam fight.

[famicommander]

Povetkin was a WBA and WBO mandatory. An IBF mando hasn't been done since the Takam fight.

The WBO said Povetkin would satisfy their mandatory but then changed their minds.

[N/A]

The rotation is screwed up because the IBF doesn't account for rematch clauses.

It's supposed to be the WBO's "turn", but because the WBO didn't enforce their mandatory after the first Ruiz vs Joshua fight, the IBF considers the WBO's turn "skipped" and is enforcing their own mandatory at the same time that the WBO is enforcing theirs.

no what happened is povetkin was wba AND wbo mandatory. then hearn did some backroom maneuvering and had the wbo not count povetkin as a mandatory defense even though he was #1 in the wbo.

the ibf's refusing to play along with those shenanigans.

[JakeTheBoxer]

Parker - Usyk for "free" WBO, winner fights Joshua.

[Tecnoworld]

Great match this would be. And aj would be forced to meet the winner to try to unificate again!

[ShaneMosleySr]

Parker wouldn’t win one second of that fight.

They’re the same size, Usyk is a much better boxer and probably hits harder too.

Thanks WBO!

[kafkod]

no what happened is povetkin was wba AND wbo mandatory. then hearn did some backroom maneuvering and had the wbo not count povetkin as a mandatory defense even though he was #1 in the wbo.

the ibf's refusing to play along with those shenanigans.

Even if Hearn could do that, why would he not want AJ to fulfill 2 mandatory obligations in one fight?