BoxRec

wesshaw1985 wrote:

bigjack wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote: The belts are irrelevant either way. Fury is the man who beat the man, taking his IBF from him didn't change that and neither will stripping the remainder...

The belts are very relevant to the other fighters who are wanting a shot,yes Fury is the man who beat the man but owning one of the world titles can make someone a good living,true champ or not.

Agreed, the belts are relevant to other fighters so they can kid the casual viewing audience into thinking they are something they are not.
Who holds the various version's of the HW Title shouldn't matter to anybody in the know, Tyson is THE HW Champion, until he is beaten or retires it will remain that way...

Like i said Tyson is the champ,but for gods sake fight,that's all we ask.

wesshaw1985 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote: Agreed, the belts are relevant to other fighters so they can kid the casual viewing audience into thinking they are something they are not.
Who holds the various version's of the HW Title shouldn't matter to anybody in the know, Tyson is THE HW Champion, until he is beaten or retires it will remain that way...

Or becomes irrelevant from not fighting. You don't remain the man if you don't get in the ring and defend your title.

True, if somebody beats a couple of names in the top 5 (Fury/Klitschko/Povetkin/Wilder/Joshua) whilst Fury is inactive then they could take his spot, don't see that happening though, do you?
Wilder and AJ can't surpass him knocking over bums now can they?

If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

I completely agree mate. If he was injured, that would be one thing, but he signed a contract with a rematch clause. He should shut up and get on with it.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

samwbr wrote:Any danger of Fury getting stripped over this?

The belts are irrelevant either way. Fury is the man who beat the man, taking his IBF from him didn't change that and neither will stripping the remainder...

To remain the man, he'll have to actually fight though. All this ankle business coupled with gadding about in France getting pissed, doesn't really convey the impression of a man aching to get in the ring.

All of this will be forgotten if the rematch goes ahead, if it doesn't alarm bells will begin to ring that Tyson maybe doesn't have the appetite to defend the belt, as he insinuated himself.

I'm starting to get into the mindset that Fury beating Klitchko was an anomaly (I know that doesn't change what actually happened). I'm not sure one win should propel a man to the top of the game. He has beaten the man (albeit in the final years of his boxing career) so deserves credit for it, but his lack of activity in the last 12 months only serves discredit his status. Perhaps the boxrec rankings should dissolve over time (not massively - but enough to punish inactivity).

keithmoonhangover wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

I completely agree mate. If he was injured, that would be one thing, but he signed a contract with a rematch clause. He should shut up and get on with it.

If the contract is written up and signed, then none of the details should change, so I don't know what the Fury's are playing at. I can imagine that the Fury's are all; 'Tyson is the champion, he should not be the one to bow down to a challenger!'.

No one will ever figure out what Tyson is up to I wouldn't even bother trying.

Maybe Tyson Fury will give up the Heavyweight Title the same way Wlad did. By not fighting.

Fury is going to end up getting stripped of the titles unless the drug allegations are resolved soon and he gets back in the ring to face Wlad.

gilgamesh wrote:Maybe Tyson Fury will give up the Heavyweight Title the same way Wlad did. By not fighting.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Or becomes irrelevant from not fighting. You don't remain the man if you don't get in the ring and defend your title.

True, if somebody beats a couple of names in the top 5 (Fury/Klitschko/Povetkin/Wilder/Joshua) whilst Fury is inactive then they could take his spot, don't see that happening though, do you?
Wilder and AJ can't surpass him knocking over bums now can they?

If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

Again ABC titles are meaningless really.
If Fury doesn't fight in the next 3 months is he is no longer the number 1 in the division?
Who would take his spot out of interest?

Rob3_142 wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

I completely agree mate. If he was injured, that would be one thing, but he signed a contract with a rematch clause. He should shut up and get on with it.

If the contract is written up and signed, then none of the details should change, so I don't know what the Fury's are playing at. I can imagine that the Fury's are all; 'Tyson is the champion, he should not be the one to bow down to a challenger!'.

When the fight was scheduled to take place in Manchester, the ticket prices were sky high, mick was the promoter and some thought he was trying to make up the revenue shortfall (difference between Sky ppv and what BN pay) by making more money from ticket sales, now wlad says team fury are trying to change some of the financial parts of a signed contract, which again suggests efforts to extract more money from the promotion. The impression I get is that nobody has a grip on this rematch - compared to say how matchroom or fwank would totally control a big show - and it is struggling to stay on track. Maxing the ticket prices or trying to screw wlad out of money as has come out today, comes across as cashing out. Are relationships/deals coming to an end ? In a way it's remarkable how bad it's gone for fury since he beat wlad last year, and how little money has been made from it. Joshua is making millions per fight, Eddie and sky are coining it in too, 3-4 times a year, with no scandals, postponements or boat-rocking. Good luck to Tyson he deserves better than this.

JOHN3:16. ‏@Tyson_Fury - 7h

On behalf of me & my team I'd like to say the fight has been signed. Thank you to every that has been involved in making it. It's been hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4THiCJL8n64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6co7NBQfws
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suUyQtVq-ek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofUQubW-sI0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwxcZDl6YZ8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWHpvD1e-Fo

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Or becomes irrelevant from not fighting. You don't remain the man if you don't get in the ring and defend your title.

True, if somebody beats a couple of names in the top 5 (Fury/Klitschko/Povetkin/Wilder/Joshua) whilst Fury is inactive then they could take his spot, don't see that happening though, do you?
Wilder and AJ can't surpass him knocking over bums now can they?

If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

What about when Bob Fitzsimmons took over two years to defend his titles?

Jack Johnson and James J Jeffories both didn't defend their titles in over a year.

Muhammad Ali took over a year to give Liston a rematch.

If what you said was true the title lineage would look very different.

BitPlayer wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote: True, if somebody beats a couple of names in the top 5 (Fury/Klitschko/Povetkin/Wilder/Joshua) whilst Fury is inactive then they could take his spot, don't see that happening though, do you?
Wilder and AJ can't surpass him knocking over bums now can they?

If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

What about when Bob Fitzsimmons took over two years to defend his titles?

Jack Johnson and James J Jeffories both didn't defend their titles in over a year.

Muhammad Ali took over a year to give Liston a rematch.

If what you said was true the title lineage would look very different.

I'm saying it should be like that, obviously there's been exceptions, but in an ideal world, champs should defend their titles in the space of a year.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

BitPlayer wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
If Tyson fails to defend his title within a year, then he is no longer the champ in my eyes, that's how it always used to be, and how it should be.

What about when Bob Fitzsimmons took over two years to defend his titles?

Jack Johnson and James J Jeffories both didn't defend their titles in over a year.

Muhammad Ali took over a year to give Liston a rematch.

If what you said was true the title lineage would look very different.

I'm saying it should be like that, obviously there's been exceptions, but in an ideal world, champs should defend their titles in the space of a year.

in an ideal world there should only be one champ.
if the champ doesnt defend in a year an interim should be created and fought out between no.2 and no.3 in the division.
if the champ doesnt defend in 2 he should be stripped.
IMO.

fight wont ever happen according to Wlads manager - http://www.BS.com/klitschko-ma ... es--115315

wesshaw1985 wrote:fight wont ever happen according to Wlads manager - http://www.BS.com/klitschko-ma ... es--115315

You can't blame them really after the fiasco regarding the rematch. Wlad's 41, I'd imagine that win or lose this will be his last fight anyway.