BoxRec

Danny Jacobs earned $1.5m when he fought Peter Quillin. Prior to the Kell Brook fight, Gennady Golovkin’s career-high payday was $2m - the sums he earned against Lemieux and Wade.

If boxing scribes (such as Dan Rafael) are adamant in their claims about Team GGG refusing to take less than 75% of the purse split (as per the WBA's super champion rules), how on earth can this bout be made?

Assuming Danny Jacobs is expecting to receive an amount much more than he got paid to defeat Quillin (say $2.5m), then for Golovkin’s 75% lion’s share of the purse would equate to $7.5m. GGG earned a career-high payday of $4m to defeat Kell Brook.

Tom Loeffler’s decision to use the WBA’s purse split rules, is likely to scupper this bout, unless someone compromises… and to be perfectly honest, I don’t see any reason why Jacobs (as the WBA regular champion) should accept less than $2.5m, based on what he’s capable of earning against easier opponents.

So the WBA may need to apply a one-off change to their own rules in order make this bout happen.

In the same article, Rafael says ...
That is a nonstarter, most likely because Golovkin has an exclusive contract with HBO, the network that has built him into a star.

We need to create an objective media somehow.

Enlightened-One wrote:Danny Jacobs earned $1.5m when he fought Peter Quillin. Prior to the Kell Brook fight, Gennady Golovkin’s career-high payday was $2m - the sums he earned against Lemieux and Wade.

If boxing scribes (such as Dan Rafael) are adamant in their claims about Team GGG refusing to take less than 75% of the purse split (as per the WBA's super champion rules), how on earth can this bout be made?

Assuming Danny Jacobs is expecting to receive an amount much more than he got paid to defeat Quillin (say $2.5m), then for Golovkin’s 75% lion’s share of the purse would equate to $7.5m. GGG earned a career-high payday of $4m to defeat Kell Brook.

Tom Loeffler’s decision to use the WBA’s purse split rules, is likely to scupper this bout, unless someone compromises… and to be perfectly honest, I don’t see any reason why Jacobs (as the WBA regular champion) should accept less than $2.5m, based on what he’s capable of earning against easier opponents.

So the WBA may need to apply a one-off change to their own rules in order make this bout happen.

Who said that Loefler is offering Jacobs 25% now ? I am sure that is significantly more than that. 25% share in a purse bid is supposed to push Jacobs side to agree to better conditions being offered now, that is why Loefler is pushing for it and Jacobs side is pushing changing the rules.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:Danny Jacobs earned $1.5m when he fought Peter Quillin. Prior to the Kell Brook fight, Gennady Golovkin’s career-high payday was $2m - the sums he earned against Lemieux and Wade.

If boxing scribes (such as Dan Rafael) are adamant in their claims about Team GGG refusing to take less than 75% of the purse split (as per the WBA's super champion rules), how on earth can this bout be made?

Assuming Danny Jacobs is expecting to receive an amount much more than he got paid to defeat Quillin (say $2.5m), then for Golovkin’s 75% lion’s share of the purse would equate to $7.5m. GGG earned a career-high payday of $4m to defeat Kell Brook.

Tom Loeffler’s decision to use the WBA’s purse split rules, is likely to scupper this bout, unless someone compromises… and to be perfectly honest, I don’t see any reason why Jacobs (as the WBA regular champion) should accept less than $2.5m, based on what he’s capable of earning against easier opponents.

So the WBA may need to apply a one-off change to their own rules in order make this bout happen.

Who said that Loefler is offering Jacobs 25% now ? I am sure that is significantly more than that. 25% share in a purse bid is supposed to push Jacobs side to agree to better conditions being offered now, that is why Loefler is pushing for it and Jacobs side is pushing changing the rules.

Let’s not debate about your preferred perception of reality and let us instead discuss real-world events that’s being discussed by the media:

• According to the official WBA website, Tom Loeffler recommended to the WBA that the GGG-Jacobs bout should proceed to purse bids
• According to the rules of the WBA, Article 9, Section D orders that the percentages for the fight between a Super World and World champion are 75% and 25% respectively.
• Certain parts of the media, such as Dan Rafael (ESPN), are refusing to believe that Team Golovkin are willing to compromise by accepting less than 75% of the winning purse bid
• According to the official WBA website, Danny Jacobs’ lawyer have asked the WBA Championship Committee to reconsider the percentages in advance of the purse bid
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Golovkin to vacate his world title if the promoter who gains the rights to promote the bout, subsequently refuses to allow HBO to have exclusive rights to televise it
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Jacobs to vacate his world title if the size of his fight purse does not meet expectations or if Haymon refuses to work with HBO

You’re looking for an argument because you insist on discussing mythical situations that cannot be proven, whereas I live in the real-world, whereby my opinions are based on evidence and events that actually occurred in real life.

Jacobs made $1.5m for Quillin (a fight that drew a measly 386k viewers) but was has he gotten for other bouts? I believe he only made $500k against Mora.

He isn't a draw and doesn't have a belt that GGG can win, so I'm not sure what makes him deserving of significantly more money than someone like Lemieux.

crusader wrote:Jacobs made $1.5m for Quillin (a fight that drew a measly 386k viewers) but was has he gotten for other bouts? I believe he only made $500k against Mora.

He isn't a draw and doesn't have a belt that GGG can win, so I'm not sure what makes him deserving of significantly more money than someone like Lemieux.

I think you're right- he doesn't deserve more money really but fighters tend to weight up the risk/reward ratio and obviously Golovkin is a bigger risk than anyone else in the middleweight division and thus subsequently he's going to want to be compensated to how he sees fit for taking that risk.

I don't think he deserves it but I understand the reasoning.

crusader wrote:Jacobs made $1.5m for Quillin (a fight that drew a measly 386k viewers) but was has he gotten for other bouts? I believe he only made $500k against Mora.

He isn't a draw and doesn't have a belt that GGG can win, so I'm not sure what makes him deserving of significantly more money than someone like Lemieux.

Your argument is weak and is not thought through.

Why would any human being be willing to be paid less to face Gennady Golovkin than what they earned to fight Peter Quillin?

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:Jacobs made $1.5m for Quillin (a fight that drew a measly 386k viewers) but was has he gotten for other bouts? I believe he only made $500k against Mora.

He isn't a draw and doesn't have a belt that GGG can win, so I'm not sure what makes him deserving of significantly more money than someone like Lemieux.

I think you're right- he doesn't deserve more money really but fighters tend to weight up the risk/reward ratio and obviously Golovkin is a bigger risk than anyone else in the middleweight division and thus subsequently he's going to want to be compensated to how he sees fit for taking that risk.

I don't think he deserves it but I understand the reasoning.

I can understand a fighter calling for more money, but on drawing power Jacobs doesn't merit significantly more $$$$ than Lemiuex did, he doesn't have a full title GGG can win, and while he'd be a good win for GGG I wouldn't say that he's so well regarded that beating him would be worth significantly overpaying him.

This can be one issue with overpaying fighters. Jacobs made 1.5m for a bout that did terrible ratings and he's never shown himself to be a serious draw, yet now some think it's absurd that he wouldn't get paid more than this for facing GGG. If Jacobs' drawing power was actually in line with million dollar and up purses there would probably be more money to work with for this fight.

crusader wrote:

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:Jacobs made $1.5m for Quillin (a fight that drew a measly 386k viewers) but was has he gotten for other bouts? I believe he only made $500k against Mora.

He isn't a draw and doesn't have a belt that GGG can win, so I'm not sure what makes him deserving of significantly more money than someone like Lemieux.

I think you're right- he doesn't deserve more money really but fighters tend to weight up the risk/reward ratio and obviously Golovkin is a bigger risk than anyone else in the middleweight division and thus subsequently he's going to want to be compensated to how he sees fit for taking that risk.

I don't think he deserves it but I understand the reasoning.

I can understand a fighter calling for more money, but on drawing power Jacobs doesn't merit significantly more $$$$ than Lemiuex did, he doesn't have a full title GGG can win, and while he'd be a good win for GGG I wouldn't say that he's so well regarded that beating him would be worth significantly overpaying him.

This can be one issue with overpaying fighters. Jacobs made 1.5m for a bout that did terrible ratings and he's never shown himself to be a serious draw, yet now some think it's absurd that he wouldn't get paid more than this for facing GGG.

What fight purse do you believe Danny Jacobs deserves to earn?

You're back on ignore ferg. I can see with your previous post directed to me that in you're in full-on distorting the argument mode.

And lol at you deletling the 'WTF!' part

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:Danny Jacobs earned $1.5m when he fought Peter Quillin. Prior to the Kell Brook fight, Gennady Golovkin’s career-high payday was $2m - the sums he earned against Lemieux and Wade.

If boxing scribes (such as Dan Rafael) are adamant in their claims about Team GGG refusing to take less than 75% of the purse split (as per the WBA's super champion rules), how on earth can this bout be made?

Assuming Danny Jacobs is expecting to receive an amount much more than he got paid to defeat Quillin (say $2.5m), then for Golovkin’s 75% lion’s share of the purse would equate to $7.5m. GGG earned a career-high payday of $4m to defeat Kell Brook.

Tom Loeffler’s decision to use the WBA’s purse split rules, is likely to scupper this bout, unless someone compromises… and to be perfectly honest, I don’t see any reason why Jacobs (as the WBA regular champion) should accept less than $2.5m, based on what he’s capable of earning against easier opponents.

So the WBA may need to apply a one-off change to their own rules in order make this bout happen.

Who said that Loefler is offering Jacobs 25% now ? I am sure that is significantly more than that. 25% share in a purse bid is supposed to push Jacobs side to agree to better conditions being offered now, that is why Loefler is pushing for it and Jacobs side is pushing changing the rules.

Let’s not debate about your preferred perception of reality and let us instead discuss real-world events that’s being discussed by the media:

• According to the official WBA website, Tom Loeffler recommended to the WBA that the GGG-Jacobs bout should proceed to purse bids
• According to the rules of the WBA, Article 9, Section D orders that the percentages for the fight between a Super World and World champion are 75% and 25% respectively.
• Certain parts of the media, such as Dan Rafael (ESPN), are refusing to believe that Team Golovkin are willing to compromise by accepting less than 75% of the winning purse bid
• According to the official WBA website, Danny Jacobs’ lawyer have asked the WBA Championship Committee to reconsider the percentages in advance of the purse bid
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Golovkin to vacate his world title if the promoter who gains the rights to promote the bout, subsequently refuses to allow HBO to have exclusive rights to televise it
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Jacobs to vacate his world title if the size of his fight purse does not meet expectations or if Haymon refuses to work with HBO

You’re looking for an argument because you insist on discussing mythical situations that cannot be proven, whereas I live in the real-world, whereby my opinions are based on evidence and events that actually occurred in real life.

- According to elementary math, 2x2=4
- According to geography, Africa is a continent

Should we continue your way or we are allowed to use brains ? Loefler is pushing for a purse bid as means of applying pressure on Jacobs who is not accepting whatever he is being offered. There is no way Jacobs can get more than a current offer if things go to the purse bid and the split is 25/75. He is likely being offered $2-2.5 mil, and he has no grounds to demand more.

We are dealing with another stunt like we saw with Eubank Jr, where one side just doesn't want the fight, so they keep making demands until those become unacceptable.

crusader wrote:I can understand a fighter calling for more money, but on drawing power...

This can be one issue with overpaying fighters... yet now some think it's absurd that he wouldn't get paid more than this for facing GGG.

What fight purse do you believe Danny Jacobs deserves to earn?

boxing_rocks wrote:- According to elementary math, 2x2=4
- According to geography, Africa is a continent

Fascinating stuff.

You must have some sort of obscure form of Keyboard Tourette’s syndrome that compels you to go off-topic and discuss things like maths and geography?

boxing_rocks wrote:Should we continue your way or we are allowed to use brains?

I think we should continue my way and discuss events that are taking place in the real world, since you’ve already proven that you’re unable to use facts that are pertinent to the subject matter.

boxing_rocks wrote:Loefler is pushing for a purse bid as means of applying pressure on Jacobs who is not accepting whatever he is being offered.

Tom Loeffler simply believes that it is unlikely that both parties will reach an agreement before the WBA’s deadline, hence his recommendation of the purse bid. If this ploy also fulfils an alternative agenda, such as orchestrating a bigger purse split, then fine.

boxing_rocks wrote:There is no way Jacobs can get more than a current offer if things go to the purse bid and the split is 25/75.

What is the current offer or are you merely speculating?

boxing_rocks wrote:He is likely being offered $2-2.5 mil, and he has no grounds to demand more.

If that’s the amounts being offered to Danny Jacobs, then I would deem those as reasonable. However, the actual sums being offered aren’t public knowledge, so why bother to use our imaginations for formulate fictional scenarios that probably won’t reflect reality?

boxing_rocks wrote:We are dealing with another stunt like we saw with Eubank Jr, where one side just doesn't want the fight, so they keep making demands until those become unacceptable.

Until we know the outcome of the purse bid and the details of the fight negotiations are released to the public domain, it’s inappropriate to hold a derogatory opinion about people without possessing any facts whatsoever.

In my mind, it’s wholly unacceptable to use prejudice and stereotyping to formulate negative and derogatory assumptions about an individual or a group of people you know absolutely nothing about.

crusader wrote:I can understand a fighter calling for more money, but on drawing power...

This can be one issue with overpaying fighters... yet now some think it's absurd that he wouldn't get paid more than this for facing GGG.

What fight purse do you believe Danny Jacobs deserves to earn?

Golovkin is a much bigger draw in Jacobs hometown. 70/30

I’ve reviewed the ballpark paydays for six of Golovkin’s last nine bouts and it seems that his opponents’ were paid an average of 43% of the total combined fight purse.
• Golovkin = $4m; Brook = $4m (plus PPV buys) (50.0%)
• Golovkin = $2m; Lemieux = $1.5m (42.9%)
• Golovkin = $900K; Rubio = $450K (33.3%)
• Golovkin = $750K; Geale = $600k (44.4%)
• Golovkin = $400K; Stevens = $290K (42.0%)
• Golovkin = $350K; Macklin = $300K (46.2%)

I excluded from consideration fight purses for the following opponents:
• Martin Murray = The fight purses weren’t announced
• Dominic Wade & Willie Monroe Jr. = These were anonymous fighters that were nowhere near Danny Jacobs’ ilk in terms of fame, calibre and accomplishments

So it seems that there are Golovkin-biased people that have submitted posts in this thread bodly-proclaiming that by demanding more than 25% of the purse split, Danny Jacobs is being unreasonable, running scared and is also pricing himself out of the fight, despite the following facts being irrefutably true:
• The Miracle Man is rated by ESPN, Ring & BoxRec as the second best 160lb-er on the planet, ranked immediately below GGG
• Gennady Golovkin has never faced a middleweight opponent with an ESPN, Ring & BoxRec rating as high as Danny Jacobs
• The Miracle Man received $1.5m for his first round stoppage victory over Peter Quillin and none of GGG’s previous opponents have ever received a payday anywhere near that size
• The average high profile Gennady Golovkin opponent is paid an average of 43% of the total combined fight purse
• Danny Jacobs’ attorney has petitioned the WBA for a 40% share of the total fight purse, which is slightly less than the average paid to high-profile GGG opponents

So those people that are criticising Danny Jacobs’, without possessing any facts whatsoever, are either being extremely naïve or hideously dishonest!

It is not about percentages at this time. Percentages are important for a purse bid. At this time, Danny just doesn't like an absolute value of what he was offered. He doesn't understand that that fight is not worse more than $5-6 million.

When does the negotiation period end; Wednesday?

lefty wrote:When does the negotiation period end; Wednesday?

I think it got extended till the 22nd. Chances are, the fight is not happening on December 10th, as fighters are supposed to start their camps before the 22nd.

boxing_rocks wrote:It is not about percentages at this time. Percentages are important for a purse bid.

You are not privy to the contract negotiations, so there’s no point in guessing.

A fundamental understanding of basic maths can calculate the sort of deal Danny Jacobs was being offered during his teams’ contract negotiations with Tom Loeffler, since his own attorney has only petitioned for a 40% split of the fight purse. If he was being greedy and wanted more, he would have asked the WBA for a bigger share.

boxing_rocks wrote:At this time, Danny just doesn't like an absolute value of what he was offered.

I haven’t read about any complaints from Danny Jacobs’ team about Tom Loeffler’s recommendation to the WBA to proceed to the purse bids.

boxing_rocks wrote:He doesn't understand that that fight is not worse more than $5-6 million.

Once again, you are not privy to the contract negotiations, so there’s no point in guessing.

That being said, I really don’t mind being proven wrong about this if you can silence me with facts?

Anyway, you need to make your mind up, because one minute you’re saying the following:

boxing_rocks wrote:Who said that Loefler is offering Jacobs 25% now ? I am sure that is significantly more than that.

So when you realise we’re talking about purse bids, you move your argument to new ground, such as:

boxing_rocks wrote:We are dealing with another stunt like we saw with Eubank Jr, where one side just doesn't want the fight, so they keep making demands until those become unacceptable.

And then you make further accussations, such as:

boxing_rocks wrote:Danny knew that he is not gonna fight GGG and didn't want to see fans' reaction.

The only thing we agree on is the fact that Danny Jacobs is requesting 40% share of the purse split instead of the WBA’s stipulated 25%... and I genuinely believe that the former figure is much more reasonable than the latter:

Jacobs’ attorney, Leon Margules, petitioned the WBA to alter the split in the case of co-champions to 60-40, and Mendoza said a WBA committee has voted on the matter, declining to reveal the outcome.

And in case you want to question my knowledge of the GGG-Jacobs situation, let me resubmit extracts I submitted in an earlier post in this thread:

Enlightened-One wrote:• According to the official WBA website, Tom Loeffler recommended to the WBA that the GGG-Jacobs bout should proceed to purse bids
• According to the rules of the WBA, Article 9, Section D orders that the percentages for the fight between a Super World and World champion are 75% and 25% respectively.
• Certain parts of the media, such as Dan Rafael (ESPN), are refusing to believe that Team Golovkin are willing to compromise by accepting less than 75% of the winning purse bid
• According to the official WBA website, Danny Jacobs’ lawyer have asked the WBA Championship Committee to reconsider the percentages in advance of the purse bid
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Golovkin to vacate his world title if the promoter who gains the rights to promote the bout, subsequently refuses to allow HBO to have exclusive rights to televise it
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Jacobs to vacate his world title if the size of his fight purse does not meet expectations or if Haymon refuses to work with HBO

Jacobs is no Champion until he beats GGG the Champs biggest purse was $4m against Brook in the UK so that being said there is no way Jacobs should be making $2.5m unless GGG is getting $10m after all he's the Champion

Politics interfering with boxing yet again

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:Jacobs is no Champion until he beats GGG the Champs biggest purse was $4m against Brook in the UK so that being said there is no way Jacobs should be making $2.5m unless GGG is getting $10m after all he's the Champion

So you're saying that Danny Jacobs only deserves to be paid 20% of the purse bid total, which is less than the WBA's 25% stipulated figure and also the 43% typically enjoyed by GGG's high-profile opponents?

Are you seriously proposing the notion that Danny Jacobs deserves to receive the same percentage that the anonymous Dominic Wade received when he faced GGG?

boxing_rocks wrote:It is not about percentages at this time. Percentages are important for a purse bid. At this time, Danny just doesn't like an absolute value of what he was offered. He doesn't understand that that fight is not worse more than $5-6 million.

Funny thing is how these paydays would work out following some of the logic that's been used in various GGG-Jacobs discussions.

So Jacobs should get more than $1.5m because that's what he got against Quillin, who is markedly worse than GGG. Okay, so lets give him $3m. But this also means that, to be fair and consistent rather than biased and selective, since GGG got $4m against Brook he should get a significantly higher purse against the bigger and more dangerous Jacobs. So let's give him $6m.

But wait, the split needs to be more evenly balanced, so let's bump up Jacobs to $4m and a 40 percent cut of the total purses. Now we're paying out $10m to see GGG face a guy who drew 386k viewers in his biggest fight, and this is without any involvement of a supposedly unfair purse bid

Enlightened-One wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:It is not about percentages at this time. Percentages are important for a purse bid.

You are not privy to the contract negotiations, so there’s no point in guessing.

A fundamental understanding of basic maths can calculate the sort of deal Danny Jacobs was being offered during his teams’ contract negotiations with Tom Loeffler, since his own attorney has only petitioned for a 40% split of the fight purse. If he was being greedy and wanted more, he would have asked the WBA for a bigger share.

boxing_rocks wrote:At this time, Danny just doesn't like an absolute value of what he was offered.

I haven’t read about any complaints from Danny Jacobs’ team about Tom Loeffler’s recommendation to the WBA to proceed to the purse bids.

boxing_rocks wrote:He doesn't understand that that fight is not worse more than $5-6 million.

Once again, you are not privy to the contract negotiations, so there’s no point in guessing.

That being said, I really don’t mind being proven wrong about this if you can silence me with facts?

Anyway, you need to make your mind up, because one minute you’re saying the following:

boxing_rocks wrote:Who said that Loefler is offering Jacobs 25% now ? I am sure that is significantly more than that.

So when you realise we’re talking about purse bids, you move your argument to new ground, such as:

boxing_rocks wrote:We are dealing with another stunt like we saw with Eubank Jr, where one side just doesn't want the fight, so they keep making demands until those become unacceptable.

And then you make further accussations, such as:

boxing_rocks wrote:Danny knew that he is not gonna fight GGG and didn't want to see fans' reaction.

The only thing we agree on is the fact that Danny Jacobs is requesting 40% share of the purse split instead of the WBA’s stipulated 25%... and I genuinely believe that the former figure is much more reasonable than the latter:

Jacobs’ attorney, Leon Margules, petitioned the WBA to alter the split in the case of co-champions to 60-40, and Mendoza said a WBA committee has voted on the matter, declining to reveal the outcome.

And in case you want to question my knowledge of the GGG-Jacobs situation, let me resubmit extracts I submitted in an earlier post in this thread:

Enlightened-One wrote:• According to the official WBA website, Tom Loeffler recommended to the WBA that the GGG-Jacobs bout should proceed to purse bids
• According to the rules of the WBA, Article 9, Section D orders that the percentages for the fight between a Super World and World champion are 75% and 25% respectively.
• Certain parts of the media, such as Dan Rafael (ESPN), are refusing to believe that Team Golovkin are willing to compromise by accepting less than 75% of the winning purse bid
• According to the official WBA website, Danny Jacobs’ lawyer have asked the WBA Championship Committee to reconsider the percentages in advance of the purse bid
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Golovkin to vacate his world title if the promoter who gains the rights to promote the bout, subsequently refuses to allow HBO to have exclusive rights to televise it
• It is possible that the winning purse bid could force Jacobs to vacate his world title if the size of his fight purse does not meet expectations or if Haymon refuses to work with HBO

Wow, it is hard to be more annoying than you. Back to ignore list.