You heard it here first!

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 07 Jan 2004, 19:53

Michael Gomez is to relinquish his British super-featherweight title to concentrate on his forthcoming WBU title crack at Kevin Lear. Alex Arthur contests the vacant crown with Salisbury's Henry Castle.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 08 Jan 2004, 03:52

Cracking scoop. So much for easing Arthur gently back into things eh? Arthur sells too many tickets and his battle with Gomez is still fresh in SKY bosses hands to be kept on the sidelines for too long.

Rightly or wrongly Arthur himself has said he wants to get back into title action so he has been presented with an opportunity to prove his worth. I'm sure the winner of Arthur-Castle will fight the winner of Lear-Gomez, unless Gavin Rees comes into the equation.

In fact, Arthur has got off lightly in the sense that he's got Castle and not Rees. I don't know a lot about Henry Castle but wasnt he dropped by Sports Network for not making the grade? And, he's not a big hitter either is he?

If Arthur cant win this then his career really is over.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 05:33

I bloody hope Arthur wins too, because I want to see Gomez v Arthur II and Barnes v Vincent II on the same bill next year.

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 08 Jan 2004, 05:47

Please can someone clarify the following rule for me:

Do British title holders:

a) Have to vacate their domestic title when they challenge for a world title?

or

b) Have to vacate their domestic title when they win a world title?

Thank you.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:00

Well they definitely don't have to vacate just for challenging, but probably do if they win. I can't imagine any British fighter wanting to keep making defences of the British title anyway if he'd picked up a world title belt, it's far less profitable.

Not quite 100% clarification but I did my best.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:17

FlawedGenius wrote:Please can someone clarify the following rule for me:

Do British title holders:

a) Have to vacate their domestic title when they challenge for a world title?

or

b) Have to vacate their domestic title when they win a world title?

Thank you.

Yes, I agree Jimmy - Gomez has a right to feel agrieved. The answer is B I believe. Matthew Barney a perfect recent example.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:25

The thing is it's clearly not a world title belt. It's like trading in your Rolex for a Tescos watch

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:27

But the Tesco's watch is the better investment.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:28

Why, do you get a discount on beans or something if you wear one? Like loyalty points?

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:29

If it is b) if I were Mike I wouldn't vacate, not a chance. This is the sort of situation that makes me question having a manager who is also your promoter. Your manager is supposed to look out for your best interests.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:31

So it's in the best interests of Gomez to keep hold of a belt that he's already won outright, rather than earn more money fighting for and defending a WBU title?

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:33

MightyWarrior wrote:The thing is it's clearly not a world title belt. It's like trading in your Rolex for a Tescos watch

I agree with that, but the WBU can bring in decent revenue. Gomez already has a Lonsdale belt to keep.

I just can't see any sound reason for vacating the British Title belt until you win something else. His management have clearly given him some pony advice.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:35

Ah yes I'm with ya. Gomez might not beat Lear in which case he'd be back challenging Arthur again.

Dynamite Dean Phillips · Post by **Dynamite Dean Phillips** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:35

In that situation, I would concentrate on defending the British rather than go for a WBU belt.

Obviously a genuine world title offer would make me vacate the British, but a WBU belt....come on! I'd much prefer to have that Lonsdale belt hanging on my wall than a second-rate meaningless joking 'World' title belt.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:35

FlawedGenius wrote:If it is b) if I were Mike I wouldn't vacate, not a chance. This is the sort of situation that makes me question having a manager who is also your promoter. Your manager is supposed to look out for your best interests.

I agree with you. Trouble is his manager stuck with him when his career nosedived, presented him with an opportunity to get back on track (which he magnificently took), and is now offering him (presumably) more money to fight for a world title.

Gomez is bang in the picture, win or lose V Lear - he's going to earn. Problem for Warren is that he's got to juggle Gomez, Lear, Arthur and Rees who are all on his books.

Arthur is no longer THE MAN in terms of being champ, but he's still THE MAN when it comes to putting bums on seats. Hence, he's being given, somewhat fortuitously, a route back to the domestic top.

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:35

Kilburn wrote:So it's in the best interests of Gomez to keep hold of a belt that he's already won outright, rather than earn more money fighting for and defending a WBU title?

He should fight for the WBU obviously, but he shouldn't vacate his British title until he has beaten Lear. If he loses to Lear he's got fornicate all.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:44

Dynamite Dean Phillips wrote:In that situation, I would concentrate on defending the British rather than go for a WBU belt.

Obviously a genuine world title offer would make me vacate the British, but a WBU belt....come on! I'd much prefer to have that Lonsdale belt hanging on my wall than a second-rate meaningless joking 'World' title belt.

I'm with that, if you're gonna go for something go for the European belt, something you can't get out of a christmas cracker

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 08 Jan 2004, 06:54

But surely Dean's no different than the average fighter in a sense that he wants to advance his career and look after his family?

I don't like "minor" world titles but I don't question the logic of those that choose to fight for them anymore. Rightly or wrongly the fighters earn more money fighting for them. If Dean gets offered a British title fight for say 10 grand and a WBU shot for 20 grand what's he going to do?

Fighters like Shea Neary, Ricky Hatton, Takaloo have set a precedent by fighting for the WBU and it's arguably done more for their bank balances and careers than domestic title ever could.

Take the current super-featherweights in Britain: Arthur, Gomez, Lear and Rees. All good domestic operators but it's doubtful that they can go beyond that. So what do you do with them? Let them step in world class and see they get beat, damage both their credability and marketability, or get them a cosy WBU belt and let them prove themselves at a lower level before taking stock?

The WBU, IBO and WBF are now embedded within British Boxing and they aren't going to disappear anytime soon. The Board and TV are to blame for encouraging the proliferation of these type of matches. The promoters will do what's best for their client.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Jan 2004, 07:03

Yep and in any case Gomez is the type of fighter who will always get chances to jump right back in. He would have to lose badly to Lear (which looks very unlikely) to be pushed off the radar.

Maybe giving up the British title first isn't such a financial risk after all.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 08 Jan 2004, 07:07

Kilburn wrote:Yep and in any case Gomez is the type of fighter who will always get chances to jump right back in. He would have to lose badly to Lear (which looks very unlikely) to be pushed off the radar.

Maybe giving up the British title first isn't such a financial risk after all.

Exactly. Principles aside it's not in Gomez's interests to say "I'm not prepared to give up my British title right now, boss" even if he is irritated at the thought. It will serve as a good motivator though.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Jan 2004, 08:13

FlawedGenius wrote:Please can someone clarify the following rule for me:

Do British title holders:

a) Have to vacate their domestic title when they challenge for a world title?

or

b) Have to vacate their domestic title when they win a world title?

Thank you.

Jason Booth recently won the IBO super-flyweight title and was then ordered to give up his British flyweight title. So he was still British champ when he challenged for the vacant IBO crown.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 08 Jan 2004, 09:56

dennis andries/tony sibson was for the WBC title and the british title.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Jan 2004, 10:20

Riddick Blowe wrote:dennis andries/tony sibson was for the WBC title and the british title.

Good point. When Barry McGuigan won the WBA featherweight title in 1985 from Eusebio Pedroza, he refused to give up his British title. That was selfish.

JimStone · Post by **JimStone** » 08 Jan 2004, 11:01

Interesting.

I'm pretty sure there is a rule about it now, perhaps it has been introduced since Barry Mac's fighting days. Of course it could just be an etiquette thing that I presumed was a rule.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Jan 2004, 11:09

I do believe, Jimmy, fighters only have to automatically vacate the British title if they win a world title. I know for a fact Matthew Barney, after winning his WBU light-heavyweight title, only relinquished his British super-middleweight title because he was ordered to defend it against mandatory challenger Tony Dodson and opted for a more lucrative WBU title rematch with Tony Oakey instead (which all went pear-shaped when Oakey subsequently tested postive for cocaine).
Barney bitterly regretted relinquishing his British title after the Oakey scandal broke.