Arum On Loma-Lopez: I Don't Believe In Rematch Clauses; Overused By Hearn

[Ruthless-RKO]

Arum On Loma-Lopez: I Don't Believe In Rematch Clauses; Overused By Hearn

Whoever wins when Vasiliy Lomachenko and Teofimo Lopez fight won’t owe the loser a rematch.

Lopez revealed last month that there isn’t a rematch clause in the contracts for their highly anticipated, 12-round lightweight title unification fight October 17 at MGM Grand Conference Center in Las Vegas (ESPN). Rematch clauses aren’t uncommon demands for established, favored champions that take on optional opponents, in this case Lomachenko.

Bob Arum, whose company promotes Lomachenko and Lopez, fundamentally opposed placing a rematch clause in their contracts. Arum claimed during a virtual press conference Tuesday that if their fight warrants a return encounter, Ukraine’s Lomachenko (14-1, 10 KOs) and Brooklyn’s Lopez (15-0, 12 KOs) eventually will agree to do it.

The 88-year-old Arum also criticized rival promoter Eddie Hearn for insisting on inserting rematch clauses in contracts when his favored fighters face optional opponents.

“I don’t believe in rematch clauses,” Arum said. “Rematch clauses are, in essence, overused thanks to our friend, Eddie Hearn. He puts a rematch clause in every contract, and that may indicate that he is not confident in how his fighter will perform. As far as I’m concerned, let them fight. There’ll be a winner, there’ll be a loser, and if down the road they want a rematch, that’s up to them. But I’m not requiring [it], and I don’t like to require a rematch in any contract that I do.”

It made sound business sense, of course, for Hearn to ensure that then-unbeaten superstar Anthony Joshua was guaranteed a second fight against Andy Ruiz Jr. in the event Ruiz upset him. England’s Joshua (23-1, 21 KOs) won back his IBF, IBO, WBA and WBO heavyweight titles in his immediate rematch with Ruiz (33-2, 22 KOs), who Joshua beat by unanimous decision six months after Ruiz pulled off one of the most noteworthy upsets in boxing history when he stopped the heavily favored Joshua in the seventh round of their June 2019 fight at Madison Square Garden in New York.

A rematch clause also will afford Dillian Whyte, another British heavyweight Hearn’s company promotes, an immediate opportunity to avenge his fifth-round knockout loss to Alexander Povetkin on August 22 in Brentwood, England. London’s Whyte (27-2, 18 KOs) and Russia’s Povetkin (36-2-1, 25 KOs) already are scheduled to fight again for the WBC interim title November 21 at an undetermined location in England.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Ha! Arum isn't holding back recently..

[maverick23]

Ha! Arum isn't holding back recently..

Why was there a rematch in the Wilder vs Fury fight then?

Bob promotes both of Loma and Lopez so it’s far easier to manage.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Ha! Arum isn't holding back recently..

Why was there a rematch in the Wilder vs Fury fight then?

It's better to have rematch clauses when you only promote one of the fighters..

Hearn promotes Whyte and co-promotes Povetkin, the fight didn't really need a clause. Surely a fight can be made.

Sometimes the rematch clauses have clauses were it states purse %'s in favour of the winner of the first bout. Like the one in Wilder-Fury. In those cases, it can be oryt I think.

[Wee Tommy]

Arums a slimy bastard. It’s a smart move by a manager or promoter to have a rematch clause. Nothing more or less to it.

[handsofstone]

I'm not a fan of immediate rematches except if controversy like Canelo/Golovkin 1 but any promoter worth their salt will have one for their guy

[gilgamesh]

Yeah I wish there was some kinda criteria written in like a rematch can take place, but only under certain circumstances.

As in the fight being particularly close or controversial in some way. If one guy just beat the ever loving sh*t out of the other guy in one sided fashion. Yeah, nobody really needs to see that again.

Hell have their been any fights where a guy got beat the hell up in a fight with somebody and then won the rematch?

I know there's been some where a guy lost by quick 1st or 2nd round KO or something, and then won a rematch, but I'm talking about a fight where they got beat up the whole fight in one sided fashion. I'd think turning something like that around has to be pretty rare.

[maverick23]

Ha! Arum isn't holding back recently..

Why was there a rematch in the Wilder vs Fury fight then?

It's better to have rematch clauses when you only promote one of the fighters..

Hearn promotes Whyte and co-promotes Povetkin, the fight didn't really need a clause. Surely a fight can be made.

Sometimes the rematch clauses have clauses were it states purse %'s in favour of the winner of the first bout. Like the one in Wilder-Fury. In those cases, it can be oryt I think.

Yes - fully understand that it’s better to do it when you only have one fighter but my point was more that it’s not like it’s just Hearn that does it like Arum’s implying. Arum’s done it recently with Wilder/Fury has probably done it hundreds of times in the past - just like most other promoters.

Re: Povetkin vs Whyte I fully get why they needed a clause. Things can get super messy if there isn’t one and Povetkin, other than name value for the fight, didn’t bring anything of significance to the fight whilst Whyte had a couple of fringe WBC belts but more importantly the number 1 ranking/mandatory position. Whilst Hearn is involved with Povetkin he isn’t the sole promoter so it’s not like he can fully call the shots like Bob probably can with Loma/Lopez.

[margaret thatcher]

did fury actually have a rematch clause or was it just wilder

[Ruthless-RKO]

did fury actually have a rematch clause or was it just wilder

Basically, the ‘loser’ could trigger the rematch clause.

And by doing so, getting smaller percentage this time around.

[handsofstone]

Does anyone yet know why Fury signed a rematch clause with Klitschko despite being mandatory?

[Ruthless-RKO]

Does anyone yet know why Fury signed a rematch clause with Klitschko despite being mandatory?

Is it Mandatory fights you don’t have rematch clauses isn’t it?

Maybe Wlad forced them to put it in?

That’s one rematch I really was looking forward too

[maverick23]

Does anyone yet know why Fury signed a rematch clause with Klitschko despite being mandatory?

Is it Mandatory fights you don’t have rematch clauses isn’t it?

Maybe Wlad forced them to put it in?

That’s one rematch I really was looking forward too

Fury had a choice of going to purse bids where there wouldn’t be a mandated rematch clause but he’d likely lose control of everything else and may not get as much money, or do a deal, perhaps get a little more money but have to have a rematch clause. He went for the latter.