Does Mandatory mean anything anymore?

[revpickles]

Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?


I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?


I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.


I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?


If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?


When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)


If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.


Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.


Pickles

[candyslim]

Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?

cs: It works any way they want it to work on any given day.

I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?

cs: Back handers and bribes ??? Whatever are you suggesting ?

I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.

cs: Whatever the theory, the practice is rather different. It largely depends on what suits people like Don King and Al Haymon, maybe Bob Arum and maybe others too.

I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?

cs: See answer above.

If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

cs: Well Joshua isn't the WBC champion so he has no obligation to fight Whyte who for reasons best known to the WBC isn't even their mandatory. Best known to the WBC but it's fairly clear that Al Haymon has blocked it because he doesn't want his champion facing Dillian Whyte because he could lose and that would never do. Haymon and King seem to exert a lot of control over the WBC. I suspect they have compromising photographs of Senor Sulaiman and Ann Other.

cs: The IBF mandatory is Kubrat Pulev. The WBO mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk (recently injured) and the WBA mandatory is, I believe, still to be nominated. Joshua is unlikely to be stripped because he takes his mandatory defences very seriously.

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

cs: He is the number one contender with the WBC but not their mandatory who is currently Dominic Breazeale. Probably when Wilder despatches Breazeale they will nominate Stiverne to fight Molina to establish who will be Deontay's next mandatory defence in 2023. Whyte is not the WBO mandatory and will not become so by beating Rivas.

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

cs: I believe it was Alexandr Ustinov who used to be fairly unimpressive, but who these days is pure dogshit. That's mandatory for the WBA regular belt. Not to be confused with the WBA Super belt held by Joshua, The WBA family size and economy size belts held by nobody you need concern yourself with

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?

cs: IBF bless 'em are always pretty quick off the mark. Joshua was lined up to meet Kubrat Pulev who was their mandatory (and currently is again) but Pulev got injured and pulled out. Joshua duly discharged his oblibation by beating the IBF's replacement, Carlos Takam. He was then intending to defend his WBA belt against mandatory Luis Ortiz, but Ortiz opted to give up his WBA mandatory status in order to fight Deontay Wilder for the WBC belt.

When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)

cs: The WBO's mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk. Neither are likely to replace him unless his torn bicep means he won't be fit to fight Joshua within the time-frame.

If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.

cs: Joshua isn't the obstacle to a fight with Fury. That's probably Bob Arum but like I said, the WBO' s mandatory challenger is currently Oleksandr Usyk.

Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.

cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting.

Pickles

cs: No thanks, just the onions

My comments above preceded cs:

[Thomastearns]

Re: Does Mandatory mean anything anymore?


revpickles wrote: ↑ Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?

cs: It works any way they want it to work on any given day.

I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?

cs: Back handers and bribes ??? Whatever are you suggesting ?

I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.

cs: Whatever the theory, the practice is rather different. It largely depends on what suits people like Don King and Al Haymon, maybe Bob Arum and maybe others too.

I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?

cs: See answer above.

If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

cs: Well Joshua isn't the WBC champion so he has no obligation to fight Whyte who for reasons best known to the WBC isn't even their mandatory. Best known to the WBC but it's fairly clear that Al Haymon has blocked it because he doesn't want his champion facing Dillian Whyte because he could lose and that would never do. Haymon and King seem to exert a lot of control over the WBC. I suspect they have compromising photographs of Senor Sulaiman and Ann Other.

cs: The IBF mandatory is Kubrat Pulev. The WBO mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk (recently injured) and the WBA mandatory is, I believe, still to be nominated. Joshua is unlikely to be stripped because he takes his mandatory defences very seriously.

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

cs: He is the number one contender with the WBC but not their mandatory who is currently Dominic Breazeale. Probably when Wilder despatches Breazeale they will nominate Stiverne to fight Molina to establish who will be Deontay's next mandatory defence in 2023. Whyte is not the WBO mandatory and will not become so by beating Rivas.

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

cs: I believe it was Alexandr Ustinov who used to be fairly unimpressive, but who these days is pure dogshit. That's mandatory for the WBA regular belt. Not to be confused with the WBA Super belt held by Joshua, The WBA family size and economy size belts held by nobody you need concern yourself with

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?

cs: IBF bless 'em are always pretty quick off the mark. Joshua was lined up to meet Kubrat Pulev who was their mandatory (and currently is again) but Pulev got injured and pulled out. Joshua duly discharged his oblibation by beating the IBF's replacement, Carlos Takam. He was then intending to defend his WBA belt against mandatory Luis Ortiz, but Ortiz opted to give up his WBA mandatory status in order to fight Deontay Wilder for the WBC belt.

When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)

cs: The WBO's mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk. Neither are likely to replace him unless his torn bicep means he won't be fit to fight Joshua within the time-frame.

If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.

cs: Joshua isn't the obstacle to a fight with Fury. That's probably Bob Arum but like I said, the WBO' s mandatory challenger is currently Oleksandr Usyk.

Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.

cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting.


This post needs permanently pinning up somewhere to serve as an excellent introduction into the bewildering way that professional boxing is being run today.

[Enlightened-One]

The WBC allowed Deontay Wilder to perform five voluntary defences of his title, during a (near) three-year time period, before facing his first underserving mandatory challenger (Bermane Stiverne).

Wilder will be performing only his second mandatory defence of his WBC championship against another underserving title challenger, Dominic Breazeale, 18 months after engaging in the Stiverne rematch.

Fighters like Andre Ward and Floyd Mayweather Jr. were allowed to retain ownership of some of their titles for several years without having to perform a mandatory defence of their belts.

Therefore, I’m not sure if a fighter possessing “mandatory challenger” status is really all that significant, because champions that generate a lot of money for the various sports’ governing bodies will rarely be stripped of their titles, due to their reluctance to miss out on receiving sizable sanctioning fees.

[candyslim]

All true EO and thank you for your kind words Thomas.

[jujigatame]

Mandatories are meaningless (and potentially harmful) as long as the procedure for determining mandatories is corrupt and/or arbitrary. Which it has been for pretty much the entire 15-20 years I've been a boxing fan.

[oogiebe]

So long as mandatories don't come with an "or else" they are meaningless. I reckon they do that to quiet a fighter for a few months, as I can't see any other reason based on the recent history.

[revpickles]

Re: Does Mandatory mean anything anymore?


revpickles wrote: ↑ Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?

cs: It works any way they want it to work on any given day.

I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?

cs: Back handers and bribes ??? Whatever are you suggesting ?

I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.

cs: Whatever the theory, the practice is rather different. It largely depends on what suits people like Don King and Al Haymon, maybe Bob Arum and maybe others too.

I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?

cs: See answer above.

If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

cs: Well Joshua isn't the WBC champion so he has no obligation to fight Whyte who for reasons best known to the WBC isn't even their mandatory. Best known to the WBC but it's fairly clear that Al Haymon has blocked it because he doesn't want his champion facing Dillian Whyte because he could lose and that would never do. Haymon and King seem to exert a lot of control over the WBC. I suspect they have compromising photographs of Senor Sulaiman and Ann Other.

cs: The IBF mandatory is Kubrat Pulev. The WBO mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk (recently injured) and the WBA mandatory is, I believe, still to be nominated. Joshua is unlikely to be stripped because he takes his mandatory defences very seriously.

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

cs: He is the number one contender with the WBC but not their mandatory who is currently Dominic Breazeale. Probably when Wilder despatches Breazeale they will nominate Stiverne to fight Molina to establish who will be Deontay's next mandatory defence in 2023. Whyte is not the WBO mandatory and will not become so by beating Rivas.

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

cs: I believe it was Alexandr Ustinov who used to be fairly unimpressive, but who these days is pure dogshit. That's mandatory for the WBA regular belt. Not to be confused with the WBA Super belt held by Joshua, The WBA family size and economy size belts held by nobody you need concern yourself with

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?

cs: IBF bless 'em are always pretty quick off the mark. Joshua was lined up to meet Kubrat Pulev who was their mandatory (and currently is again) but Pulev got injured and pulled out. Joshua duly discharged his oblibation by beating the IBF's replacement, Carlos Takam. He was then intending to defend his WBA belt against mandatory Luis Ortiz, but Ortiz opted to give up his WBA mandatory status in order to fight Deontay Wilder for the WBC belt.

When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)

cs: The WBO's mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk. Neither are likely to replace him unless his torn bicep means he won't be fit to fight Joshua within the time-frame.

If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.

cs: Joshua isn't the obstacle to a fight with Fury. That's probably Bob Arum but like I said, the WBO' s mandatory challenger is currently Oleksandr Usyk.

Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.

cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting.


This post needs permanently pinning up somewhere to serve as an excellent introduction into the bewildering way that professional boxing is being run today.

Thanks for this Thomas , How do i learn what you know ? where is this information you have given me and how can i learn this?

[Thomastearns]

Thanks for this Thomas , How do i learn what you know ? where is this information you have given me and how can i learn this?

I'm sorry you're struggling revpickles.

I take no credit but perhaps if you take another look at the last paragraph in the original response to your request...

"cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting."

Boxing, for a newcomer must almost be as bewildering as cricket. Even after decades of following the sport on and off it's still largely a puzzle.

The only thing you can be sure of with organised sports is the perpetual drive to transform it into a money transfer business.

Your pocket to theirs.

[revpickles]

The WBC allowed Deontay Wilder to perform five voluntary defences of his title, during a (near) three-year time period, before facing his first underserving mandatory challenger (Bermane Stiverne).

Wilder will be performing only his second mandatory defence of his WBC championship against another underserving title challenger, Dominic Breazeale, 18 months after engaging in the Stiverne rematch.

Fighters like Andre Ward and Floyd Mayweather Jr. were allowed to retain ownership of some of their titles for several years without having to perform a mandatory defence of their belts.

Therefore, I’m not sure if a fighter possessing “mandatory challenger” status is really all that significant, because champions that generate a lot of money for the various sports’ governing bodies will rarely be stripped of their titles, due to their reluctance to miss out on receiving sizable sanctioning fees.

So if mandatory is broken and promotors look more towards turning fighters into hero figures by protecting the '0'- how does this inspire fighters wanting a career in boxing without the bulls$it.

Fighting men do not creep, nor should they have to arse lick anyone to become a world champion -fighters should be able to let there fists do the talking, and without a clear route to get to the top avoiding shirt lifters who run entertainment- do you not think this is putting off some potentially great fighters into entering into the world of boxing.

If rules can so obviously be broken this way who is to say that the rules regarding doping and PED's aren't being abused too?

I.E. certain fighters get to take performance enhancing drugs because certain promoters have bought them the privilege to avoid regular testing where as poorer fighters constantly get harassed or banned against impossible odd's.

In 2018 over 875,000 people in the UK have admitted to using cocaine and a further seven and a half percent of the population have admitted to taking cannabis on a regular basis .

With statistics like this fighters from working class backgrounds have an almost impossible task to keep away from such odds against them unless they pay for protection by promotors ?

[candyslim]

As with anything where humanity is involved Reverend, there is an enormous disconnect between the way things are and the way things ought to be. Boxing is extremely corrupt and always was. Back in the day fixes and dives were commonplace and the sport was in the grip of organized crime.

It could be argued that it is much improved today where the crime bosses have been largely replaced by legitimate businessmen whose corruption is still pervasive, but relatively discreet and lacking the subtlety-free threats of violence of yesteryear.

Of course there are winners and losers even among the boxers. To take just one highly visible example: Dillian Whyte is a real fighting man who is subjected to continuing egregious treatment by the WBC. It almost certainly isn't personal. You could actually make a case that the WBC believe themselves to be acting in the best interests of boxing. The US was for over a century the home of prize-fighting, but has now turned its back. Why is that? Well I'll let our American posters tell you because they know far more about it than I do, but I suspect one of the biggest nails in the coffin was the domination of the heavyweight title by the excellent but uninspiring Klitschko brothers. There were three major problems: They were both way better than anyone else and would suck the competitive life-blood out of the sport for well over a decade. Not unreasonably they would never fight each other, and thirdly they were foreigners whose fights occurred for the most part far away, out of sight and out of mind. It is often said that the health of boxing is largely dependent on the health of the heavyweight division.

There is currently a flicker of life. The corpse is displaying a faint pulse in the form of WBC heavyweight champion Deontay Wilder. He is an extremely dangerous and exciting fighter and not lacking in personal charisma. He is a US national who could potentially re-ignite American passion for boxing (the clock is running down though). The problem is that Wilder is not the best heavyweight in the world and as good as he is, there is an air of vulnerability about him. You play the hand you are dealt though.

The WBC are an American organization (not US but still American) and I suspect they recognize the importance of maintaining a US world heavyweight champion for the greater good of the sport. Wilder is the only candidate. Nobody on the horizon looks likely to be good enough to assume the mantle. It seems to me that the WBC also recognize that Wilder needs nurturing if he is to continue in his role as flag-bearer, and if that means keeping him away from the more dangerous challengers to his precarious position at the top of the tree then they will do whatever they can.

That's how I see it anyway.

[jujigatame]

Mandatories are a good idea that have been rendered completely worthless and counterproductive because no ABC org can be trusted to make reasonable rankings.

[Onekrazyrican]

Mandatories are a good idea that have been rendered completely worthless and counterproductive because no ABC org can be trusted to make reasonable rankings.

Exactly

Organization rankings are a joke. I cant remember the last time a big name won a title being a mandatory challenger. Mandatory defenses are a way for promoters to get something for the mere mortals in their stable. Its a waste of time only because the rankings are such a joke. You have the big names trying to negotiate big fights regardless of rankings. If you have more fighters on your stable and you can get them either a title shot or step aside money you make your best to get them into that mandatory spot.

Sad thing is that if it was actually done with meaningful fights we would probably know and care about the guy that made it to the spot. We would have probably seen him fight competitive fights against fellow ranked fighters. We would really care about that mandatory defense. But thats not the way it goes. You normally see an uninteresting mismatch with a "regional belt" on the line for a top spot on the rankings.

[jujigatame]

Right, if manatories made sense you'd see stuff like Wilder being named mandatory for Joshua. But you don't.

[Nondescript]

The IBF sanctioning body is the only that matters when it comes to being a mandatory challenger, as they're the only one that actually enforces their mandatory title shots.

Even with them, that's only because they got raided by the FBI 20 years ago and a bunch of people got indicted and sent to prison due to manipulating the rankings and accepting bribes. Pretty sure Arum was one of the people involved in offering bribes (but I could be wrong on that).

So if you're a boxer and you want to work your way up the rankings and actually get your shot at the belt, then the IBF is the best route.

[jujigatame]

Strict enforcement really isn't a good thing if you can't be trusted to name reasonable contenders.

[Cent0089]

More belts - less meaning for belt. Less meaning for belt, less meaning for mandatory defense.

[Nondescript]

Strict enforcement really isn't a good thing if you can't be trusted to name reasonable contenders.

True, but their ranking system still seems better to be honest than the other 3. Which tells you everything you need to know about boxing really lol.