Canelo/Yildirim Wasn’t a MANDATORY DEFENSE. So why Canelo?

[caldo2025]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

So why the hell would Canelo sell it as such? This fight made no sense from any angle aside from perhaps Canelo’s attempt to chase Chavez for total wins or to pound his chest at fans showing how great he is bc of how active he is as P4P #1.

I was slowly appreciating Canelo but to make a fight this bad upon a lie clearly shows how dumb he thinks that we are. Something just smells like crap with this guy from day one.

[Crease]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

Canelo IS the WBC World Champion at Super Middleweight. He won that and The Ring title from Callum Smith in their fight.

[Enlightened-One]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

So why the hell would Canelo sell it as such? This fight made no sense from any angle aside from perhaps Canelo’s attempt to chase Chavez for total wins or to pound his chest at fans showing how great he is bc of how active he is as P4P #1.

I was slowly appreciating Canelo but to make a fight this bad upon a lie clearly shows how dumb he thinks that we are. Something just smells like crap with this guy from day one.

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

[thereverend]

intentionally facetious

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

[Onetimeonly]

intentionally facetious

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

[Enlightened-One]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

So why the hell would Canelo sell it as such? This fight made no sense from any angle aside from perhaps Canelo’s attempt to chase Chavez for total wins or to pound his chest at fans showing how great he is bc of how active he is as P4P #1.

I was slowly appreciating Canelo but to make a fight this bad upon a lie clearly shows how dumb he thinks that we are. Something just smells like crap with this guy from day one.

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

[margaret thatcher]

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

[Ruthless-RKO]

LMAO. He was only FRANCHISE at 160.

Only won the 168 version in November.

[Ruthless-RKO]

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

EO is that you..

I actually read your post before I read EO's and was thinking he hacked into your account.

[The Gratest]

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

[Enlightened-One]

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

You’re welcome to turn this into a spelling, grammar and dictionary definition debate if you want to, since English isn’t my native language.

Or you can instead admit that my thoughts about caldo’s unfair criticism of Canelo are perfectly valid.

Since this is a boxing forum, I assume it's more appropriate to discuss the former, rather than the latter. Don't you agree?

If you really want to engage in lengthy debates about the nuances of the written form of the English language, where you might be able to teach me a thing or two, then let's move this chat to the off-topic page. And perhaps I can illustrate some of your spelling mistakes, so we'll both benefit from our discussion.

Alternatively, if you want to learn more about the sport of boxing, then let's discuss caldo's comments about Canelo, and I can teach you a thing or two.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

[Counter-puncher]

intentionally facetious

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

you're being facetiously facetious, bro.

[The Gratest]

It kind of makes me laugh to see intentionally facetious threads and posts from people that pretend to be knowledgeable fight fans, yet they clearly don’t understand the subject matter they’re complaining about.

If it was simply posed as a question from someone that wasn’t sure about the situation, then fair enough, that’s what the forum is about... to share knowledge.

But to suggest all sorts of nonsense and resort to fictional derogatory claims, whilst clearly being absolutely clueless about the subject matter, well that’s just appalling.

Someone else addressed your question.

And I’ve addressed your nonsense and needlessly negative claims!

Lock the thread, because there’s nothing else to say on the matter!

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

You’re welcome to turn this into a spelling, grammar and dictionary definition debate if you want to, since English isn’t my native language.

Or you can instead admit that my thoughts about caldo’s unfair criticism of Canelo are perfectly valid.

Since this is a boxing forum, I assume it's more appropriate to discuss the former, rather than the latter. Don't you agree?

If you really want to engage in lengthy debates about the nuances of the written form of the English language, where you might be able to teach me a thing or two, then let's move this chat to the off-topic page. And perhaps I can illustrate some of your spelling mistakes, so we'll both benefit from our discussion.

Alternatively, if you want to learn more about the sport of boxing, then let's discuss caldo's comments about Canelo, and I can teach you a thing or two.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

Who's yanked your chain kid? I was replying to Margaret.
See, it is clear in the post I have quoted above, it is irrefutable that I was replying to Margaret. Please find the post in this thread where I am replying to you. You can't, because I did not.

[Enlightened-One]

Facetious literally means 'to be intentionally inappropriate'. Is your use of language unintentionally intentionally inappropriate? In other words, are you being facetious?

You’re welcome to turn this into a spelling, grammar and dictionary definition debate if you want to, since English isn’t my native language.

Or you can instead admit that my thoughts about caldo’s unfair criticism of Canelo are perfectly valid.

Since this is a boxing forum, I assume it's more appropriate to discuss the former, rather than the latter. Don't you agree?

If you really want to engage in lengthy debates about the nuances of the written form of the English language, where you might be able to teach me a thing or two, then let's move this chat to the off-topic page. And perhaps I can illustrate some of your spelling mistakes, so we'll both benefit from our discussion.

Alternatively, if you want to learn more about the sport of boxing, then let's discuss caldo's comments about Canelo, and I can teach you a thing or two.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

Who's yanked your chain kid? I was replying to Margaret.
See, it is clear in the post I have quoted above, it is irrefutable that I was replying to Margaret. Please find the post in this thread where I am replying to you. You can't, because I did not.

Margaret was quoting my words. So you were replying to my words.

[The Gratest]

You’re welcome to turn this into a spelling, grammar and dictionary definition debate if you want to, since English isn’t my native language.

Or you can instead admit that my thoughts about caldo’s unfair criticism of Canelo are perfectly valid.

Since this is a boxing forum, I assume it's more appropriate to discuss the former, rather than the latter. Don't you agree?

If you really want to engage in lengthy debates about the nuances of the written form of the English language, where you might be able to teach me a thing or two, then let's move this chat to the off-topic page. And perhaps I can illustrate some of your spelling mistakes, so we'll both benefit from our discussion.

Alternatively, if you want to learn more about the sport of boxing, then let's discuss caldo's comments about Canelo, and I can teach you a thing or two.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

Who's yanked your chain kid? I was replying to Margaret.
See, it is clear in the post I have quoted above, it is irrefutable that I was replying to Margaret. Please find the post in this thread where I am replying to you. You can't, because I did not.

Margaret was quoting my words. So you were replying to my words.

Looks like you can't find anywhere in this thread where I have quoted you kid.
Well that was easy

[Ruthless-RKO]

[caldo2025]

I’ve been gone for awhile guys so be patient with me for a second, if you will?

I’m no hacker genius but has EO really gone and created multiple personalities and user names that he actually communicates back and forth with here purposely to give the illusion that he’s what? Head of a posse now? Lmao. Omg, it’s way worse now ha? Probably not something I should be laughing at.

Lol. I mean make it at least believable dude. I bet when EO goes to a costume party, he just wears his Monocle on his good eye then gets mad when people recognize him right away.

[thereverend]

You’re welcome to turn this into a spelling, grammar and dictionary definition debate if you want to, since English isn’t my native language.

Or you can instead admit that my thoughts about caldo’s unfair criticism of Canelo are perfectly valid.

Since this is a boxing forum, I assume it's more appropriate to discuss the former, rather than the latter. Don't you agree?

If you really want to engage in lengthy debates about the nuances of the written form of the English language, where you might be able to teach me a thing or two, then let's move this chat to the off-topic page. And perhaps I can illustrate some of your spelling mistakes, so we'll both benefit from our discussion.

Alternatively, if you want to learn more about the sport of boxing, then let's discuss caldo's comments about Canelo, and I can teach you a thing or two.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

Now you're just being sarcastically sardonic. Or is it sardonically sarcastic?

You 'can teach about boxing'? If it involves chasing a chicken around in an alley in Philadelphia I already know it..

[caldo2025]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

Canelo IS the WBC World Champion at Super Middleweight. He won that and The Ring title from Callum Smith in their fight.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathleti ... -it/%3famp

[Enlightened-One]

Mauricio Sulaiman clearly states that Canelo is the “Franchise Champion” (yet another kind of champion the WBC can build a belt for) which means that Canelo is free to fight down up or at SM whenever he wants to and is not subject to mandatory demands. The WBC claims to have nothing to do with making this waste of time this past weekend.

Canelo IS the WBC World Champion at Super Middleweight. He won that and The Ring title from Callum Smith in their fight.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathleti ... -it/%3famp

Sulaiman explains that the coronavirus pandemic forced the hand of the WBC, because it created a situation where they had to order a mandatory fight. 

"The mandatory challenger rule is one that has worked through the years to bring justice to the sport and for mandatory challengers to have a title shot," Sulaiman told ESPN Deportes.

"This rule has not been revised in many, many years and there are times when the regulations limit you in legal matters, because the official challenger receives rights. So when there are situations, that for some reason intervene in this mandatory procedure, we should have a review and update the process.

"In this case [with Yildirim] there was a situation that drastically changed, which was the inactivity generated by the pandemic and the effects of the pandemic itself. So we ended up ordering a fight with the official challenger, so that his rights were respected.

"In this case, two years passed and it was not anyone's fault, it was not the fault of Yildirim or the sanctioning body, but because of a pandemic. Before the pandemic he was going to fight and they canceled the fight, these are the things that happened. We must have a recourse not to be totally backed against the wall by a regulation, when extraordinary things happen."

[gilgamesh]

I don't really remember the last time a Mandatory opponent and The Best opponent available was the same thing.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Gil, You are forgetting the polish powerhouse kamil szermta - ring magazines 7th rated mw at the time

[gilgamesh]

I mean seriously since I've started watching Boxing Mandatory title defenses were almost always soft opponents. I mean Morrade Hakkar was a mandatory for Bernard Hopkins for f*cks sake.

[apollo creed]

Kamil Szeremeta (former No 7 mw rated by Ring Magazine) would TKO Yldirim at 168 lbs .

Canelo is a great fighter but he also has a a smooth path in a weak era at 168lbs b/c he's the golden goose of boxing and he calls the shots.

[Crease]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathleti ... -it/%3famp

I could put up multiple links of interviews with Eddie Hearn and Eddy Reynoso... AND Ahmet Oner where they all acknowledge that it was a Mandatory defense...
So that's the promoter, and both the fighters' Managers saying that it was a Mandatory...