BoxRec

I seen on cacace twitter he was fighting an eliminator but his fights always seem to never happen. British scene is looking good just hope the fights can be made

DMA1987 wrote:Yeah to be honest I never buy the 'just business' line. Its not true, it's his life, of course that's personal. A little deeper and more consequential than 'don't get on with' too.

Palooka wrote:I wonder if ever the managers or promoters are personally hurt when a fighter leaves them; it seems like it is often assumed that the manager/promoter is the greedy villain and the boxer is the one wrong done by. I imagine that some managers get 'close' to a boxer and likes them personally, some probably go over and beyond to try and help and get them into a better position, when the boxer wants out of the relationship I reckon it must hurt a bit.

I would think there is some truth to that. When things go sour it is rarely ever 'just business'. I would think Stephen has his reasons and clearly felt he had the right to do it. If FW starts affecting his career I can't see Paul and Liam being OK with it to be honest. The have always seemed like a family who really stick together.

JamieM wrote:I seen on cacace twitter he was fighting an eliminator but his fights always seem to never happen. British scene is looking good just hope the fights can be made

Well kays and hooper fought for english title a few weeks back and 16th nov troy james meets chris male in a british title eliminator. So the board r making 50-50 fights with the winners pushing up the rankings.

DMA1987 wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:Yeah to be honest I never buy the 'just business' line. Its not true, it's his life, of course that's personal. A little deeper and more consequential than 'don't get on with' too.

Palooka wrote:I wonder if ever the managers or promoters are personally hurt when a fighter leaves them; it seems like it is often assumed that the manager/promoter is the greedy villain and the boxer is the one wrong done by. I imagine that some managers get 'close' to a boxer and likes them personally, some probably go over and beyond to try and help and get them into a better position, when the boxer wants out of the relationship I reckon it must hurt a bit.

I would think there is some truth to that. When things go sour it is rarely ever 'just business'. I would think Stephen has his reasons and clearly felt he had the right to do it. If FW starts affecting his career I can't see Paul and Liam being OK with it to be honest. The have always seemed like a family who really stick together.

Don't know about Liam but Paul's best placed to stay put, he's got the commentary job with allegedly and the only fight signing with Hearn opens up is Fielding.

DMA1987 wrote:Warren has probably just kissed goodbye to Liam and Paul.

His night of history with 3 Smith brothers defending british titles has took an almighty blow

Anzi wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:Warren has probably just kissed goodbye to Liam and Paul.

His night of history with 3 Smith brothers defending british titles has took an almighty blow

It would be a blow to a promoter who's shows usually hold together. This promoter's shows fall apart more often than not, and I don't for one moment think he gives a monkies about it.

When I say his shows fall apart, I mean the material difference between the original announcements, and what you get on the night - he still delivers a show full of fights, but his achilles heel is booking opponents for his fighters properly. He likes the big announcement, eg Wilder for Chisora, but these announcements belly-flop more often than not and then there's a mad scramble for somebody who will appease a demoralised audience expecting the worst.

Its about time fw got abit of support from the board,all the fighters jumping ship after they made it with him. Id like to,apart from callum smith,a fighter being promoted and managed by hearn and get to world level like fw has done so many times in the past. Hearn just poaches them and has a star studded show,it will all implode cause you cant keep them all happy with only a hand full of shows per year.

Jakemilo wrote:John Simpson only fighting coyle because he couldn't get a fight

He was originally pencilled to fight Scotty Cardle but opted for Coyle instead himself.

G0mez wrote:

Jakemilo wrote:John Simpson only fighting coyle because he couldn't get a fight

He was originally pencilled to fight Scotty Cardle but opted for Coyle instead himself.

Yes I saw that mate but it would still have been at lw when earlier this year after choi fight he'd said he could make fw still and wasnt big enough for sfw yet now he's fighting at lw

Steven Smith has now had his licence suspended by the Board and unless an agreement can be reached it looks like he is a serious doubt for Froch v Groves PPV bill on the 23rd of this month.

The Insider wrote:Steven Smith has now had his licence suspended by the Board and unless an agreement can be reached it looks like he is a serious doubt for Froch v Groves PPV bill on the 23rd of this month.

Thats a rediculous decision, from what I have read the only reason why the board are supporting FW on this is because terms have been agreed, at an advance stage, for Smith to defend his British title.

I haven't seen any suggestion about issues with his contract just the FW has already put the bill in place and his defence was accepted by the BBBoC.

So... why not just strip Smith (or give him the option - defend the title on the FW show or be stripped) but allow him to fight on the 23rd.

Hearn could do what fw did with chisora and go and get a license from luxemberg,he would lose the british title but look on the bright side he will prob get to fight for the european title in 12 months or so just like chisora has done and he is next in line for the british title. If i was a professional boxer i wouldnt even have a british license cause they cant organise a piss up in brewery.

Smiths already vacated the title

stujones wrote:

The Insider wrote:Steven Smith has now had his licence suspended by the Board and unless an agreement can be reached it looks like he is a serious doubt for Froch v Groves PPV bill on the 23rd of this month.

Thats a rediculous decision, from what I have read the only reason why the board are supporting FW on this is because terms have been agreed, at an advance stage, for Smith to defend his British title.

I haven't seen any suggestion about issues with his contract just the FW has already put the bill in place and his defence was accepted by the BBBoC.

So... why not just strip Smith (or give him the option - defend the title on the FW show or be stripped) but allow him to fight on the 23rd.

The board have determined Smith's contract with FW is still valid and there has been no breach and he had agreed to fight Sykes, that was why he got the Buckland fight.

thechump wrote:Hearn could do what fw did with chisora and go and get a license from luxemberg,he would lose the british title but look on the bright side he will prob get to fight for the european title in 12 months or so just like chisora has done and he is next in line for the british title. If i was a professional boxer i wouldnt even have a british license cause they cant organise a piss up in brewery.

The board can then refuse to grant him a waiver that foreign licensed fighters need and threaten to remove the sanctioning of the entire show. The BBBofC are probably the most responsible sanctioning body there is, incredibly stringent medical checks, why you think they can't organise a piss up in a brewery I don't know.

expe wrote:

stujones wrote:

The Insider wrote:Steven Smith has now had his licence suspended by the Board and unless an agreement can be reached it looks like he is a serious doubt for Froch v Groves PPV bill on the 23rd of this month.

Thats a rediculous decision, from what I have read the only reason why the board are supporting FW on this is because terms have been agreed, at an advance stage, for Smith to defend his British title.

I haven't seen any suggestion about issues with his contract just the FW has already put the bill in place and his defence was accepted by the BBBoC.

So... why not just strip Smith (or give him the option - defend the title on the FW show or be stripped) but allow him to fight on the 23rd.

The board have determined Smith's contract with FW is still valid and there has been no breach and he had agreed to fight Sykes, that was why he got the Buckland fight.

Not how I read it, but happy to be corrected. I didn't see the bit about the longer part of the contract - just about the Sykes fight.