According to Fightews - Lou Dibella has told reporters that the fight is off, and this is the understanding of Gary Shaw.
It means that (unless it can be sorted) that Taylor will be stripped of his WBC title - with Wright fighting for the vacant title. The top 5 in the WBC ratings is - Wright, Sturm (unavailable), Pavlik, Soliman and Quartey. So it is looking likely that Wright will fight Pavlik.
Amazing in 6 months as Champion, Taylor will soon only hold the WBO version of the title. Masoe vs Sturm is for the WBA title, Abraham is the IBF champion.
Taylor vs Wright off - Taylor likely to be stripped.
-
Phenomenal-Nutrition
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 5185
- Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 14:53
Re: Taylor vs Wright off - Taylor likely to be stripped.
Agreed it is ludicorous. He's still "The Man" though....stujones wrote:According to Fightews - Lou Dibella has told reporters that the fight is off, and this is the understanding of Gary Shaw.
It means that (unless it can be sorted) that Taylor will be stripped of his WBC title - with Wright fighting for the vacant title. The top 5 in the WBC ratings is - Wright, Sturm (unavailable), Pavlik, Soliman and Quartey. So it is looking likely that Wright will fight Pavlik.
Amazing in 6 months as Champion, Taylor will soon only hold the WBO version of the title. Masoe vs Sturm is for the WBA title, Abraham is the IBF champion.
Re: Taylor vs Wright off - Taylor likely to be stripped.
Not that I really give a shit but won't Taylor still be WBA super champion?
-
Podmore_Birmingham
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 950
- Joined: 18 Oct 2005, 09:38
Whilst i dont agree with the stripping of titles , the fact remains Taylor should accomodate Winky Wright and if he does not honour that then he deserves to lose his belts , winky is the best fight out there for Taylor.
Taylor is not the long time ruler of the division that publications such as 'the ring' would have you believe , i think he will lose to Winky , if they meet.
Taylor could even be beaten by Abraham or even Sturm . Sturm could use his trusty jab to beat Taylor who doesnt look good against someone who can box.
Tom Podmore.
Taylor is not the long time ruler of the division that publications such as 'the ring' would have you believe , i think he will lose to Winky , if they meet.
Taylor could even be beaten by Abraham or even Sturm . Sturm could use his trusty jab to beat Taylor who doesnt look good against someone who can box.
Tom Podmore.
Re: Taylor vs Wright off - Taylor likely to be stripped.
It does say that in fightnews, but surely he cannot be - isn't the initial premise of the "Super" status is that you have to hold more than one title.Kilburn wrote:Not that I really give a shit but won't Taylor still be WBA super champion?
The ring title was good in principle, just a shame they changed the principles just to suit themselves. For example, because Vitali Klitchsko fought in America and was generally considered "the man" he got awarded it.... however, Ottke, despite winning the WBA and IBF titles - never got this champions. Why? Is it because the ring were adamament that the "unification" had to involve the WBC and WBA only, or is it because they knew that American's would never see the Super Middleweight ring title being defended.
-
Max Molyneux
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 7084
- Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 16:53
Re: Taylor vs Wright off - Taylor likely to be stripped.
Taylor holds the WBO so he'll still have Super status.stujones wrote:It does say that in fightnews, but surely he cannot be - isn't the initial premise of the "Super" status is that you have to hold more than one title.Kilburn wrote:Not that I really give a shit but won't Taylor still be WBA super champion?
The ring title was good in principle, just a shame they changed the principles just to suit themselves. For example, because Vitali Klitchsko fought in America and was generally considered "the man" he got awarded it.... however, Ottke, despite winning the WBA and IBF titles - never got this champions. Why? Is it because the ring were adamament that the "unification" had to involve the WBC and WBA only, or is it because they knew that American's would never see the Super Middleweight ring title being defended.
I think the ring was influenced by HBO to give Vitali the ring belt since people listen to the Ring.
About Ottke though was he and Mitchell Rated between 1 and 3 to get their title which is supposed to be their rules if 1 and 2 or 3 fights either.
Wouldn't Winky want Taylor anyway regardless of titles since he'd rather have money?
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 45231
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Hmm, not yet I don't think.
I'm not sure whose fault this is, I've heard conflicting reports. Gary Shaw seems to have claimed he offered Taylor a 60-40 split but was turned down.
I think this is all very convenient for DiBella who doesn't want his cash cow getting beat, he was always trying to talk down prospects of this fight happening whlist Taylor talked them up.
Winky needs to be realistic about his star quality though. It's better for Winky to go win a vacant title first, but he could well find himself fighting boring mandatories for tiny purses just like Hopkins did most of his career.
I'm not sure whose fault this is, I've heard conflicting reports. Gary Shaw seems to have claimed he offered Taylor a 60-40 split but was turned down.
I think this is all very convenient for DiBella who doesn't want his cash cow getting beat, he was always trying to talk down prospects of this fight happening whlist Taylor talked them up.
Winky needs to be realistic about his star quality though. It's better for Winky to go win a vacant title first, but he could well find himself fighting boring mandatories for tiny purses just like Hopkins did most of his career.