Rematch Clauses!

[Willie Pep 229]

In your opinion: Should a Champion be allowed to force a rematch clause into contract?

P.S. Does anyone know if any of the State Commissions have an opinion on the matter? ( I am not much interested in the scantioning bodies; their motivations are obvious.)

[Marchegiano]

No, I don't.

TBH, I'm not even sure how you get yourself in a position like Fury and the IBF a few years ago. Sanctioning bodies have a legal obligation to their mandatory challengers. We've seen proof of that just a ton of time but I think Ruiz-Lewis and the WBC are probably the most extreme case in that everyone was fine with Lewis not fighting Ruiz except Ruiz and Ruiz won the court battle.

How the champion himself swerves the same obligation is beyond me. Seems like it should be part of being the champion. Not just the position has the obligation but the man himself. Because obviously as is all they do is dump a belt and fight who they want to fight which leads to champions having a legal obligation to one challenger and the body having the same exact obligation to a different challenger.

I understand as is the champion has the obligation to the mandatory, but, **** like Fury-Wlad, that should have never been allowed. Not that Wlad is one of those I believe didn't deserve an immediate rematch, he's plent worthy, it's just the isn't signing any contract that would cause a conflict with another already signed contract a conflict of interest? I don't think Wlad's rematch clause should have ever gotten past the IBF in the first place. The IBF should have told Klitschko the rematch clause conflicts with the mandatory obligations so get rid of it or get stripped before the Fury fight. Fury, at the time, I believe was the WBA's mando for Wlad.

I don't think Wilder's rematch clause held up any mandatories, but, it has held up undisputed and I already think titles should be forced to unify before fighting mandos so even though that doesn't **** with how things are it contrary to my ideas for how things should be. I don't think Wilder should have a legal right to force a title fight without becoming the mandatory either.

I don't think any government agency can have an opinion outside of the legal opinion. Kinda how government works isn't it? contracts and stuff like that isn't their department, is it? I thought the coms were for safety?

[Nash out]

The Nash says that you should have to earn a rematch by beating a top contender. Rematches should be 2/3/4 fights down the line, not straight up. Nash out.

[QueensburyRules]

In your opinion: Should a Champion be allowed to force a rematch cause into contract?

P.S. Does anyone know if any of the State Commissions have an opinion on the matter? ( I am not much interested in the scantioning bodies; their motivations are obvious.)

- -State commishes just as nefarious. Rematches and ring conditions part and parcel of boxing history that can be good, bad, or ugly as Fury/Wilder.

[markusmod]

In your opinion: Should a Champion be allowed to force a rematch clause into contract?

P.S. Does anyone know if any of the State Commissions have an opinion on the matter? ( I am not much interested in the scantioning bodies; their motivations are obvious.)

If someone is a mandatory challenger, a champion is not allowed to enforce a rematch clause unless they both agree to it.

Usually a rematch clause is very profitable to the fighter who wins, because he gets a lot more money the second time.

[The Old LefHook]

All politics is negotiable in boxing. Leonard got Hagler to agree to 12 rounds instead of the historical 15, use larger gloves, and fight in the largest ring in history.

[markusmod]

All politics is negotiable in boxing. Leonard got Hagler to agree to 12 rounds instead of the historical 15, use larger gloves, and fight in the largest ring in history.

Did he pay him more for the terms?