BoxRec

ikorolev wrote:

Boxing Writer wrote:Very risky gamble from Glazkov's team. If Martin beats Glazkov (which I expect him to do), Duva will look like a fool. If they waited for Fury - Wlad winner, they would most likely get a huge payday plus step aside money. But now Glazkov most likely will be beaten for peanuts.

Martin is the best possible opponent one could ever get in a HW title fight. If Glazkov can't beat Martin, then there is no point to get involved in any title fight.

I am not sure what IBF motives are. They would definitely get way better money from the rematch sanctioning fees than from a few fights of either Martin or Glazkov. Maybe they are just trying to enforce rules?

I don't think Glazkov can beat Martin either. He is small, has no power and he can't match Martin's work rate. Unless Martin has glass jaw, Glazkov won't beat him.

zorndeslammes wrote:

SteveO wrote:

koolkc107 wrote:HE WAS STRIPPED 10 DAYS AFTER HE WON THE FRIGGIN' BELT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sadly, this makes Fury the shortest reigning IBF champion ever.

The IBF stripped Dariusz Michalczewski almost immediately after he won it (within something like 24 hours) because he wouldn't agree to fight William Guthrie within 36 days.

Ah, okay.
I should have said Heavyweight champion.

zorndeslammes wrote:If Fury loses to Glazkov, Klitschko fights Fury then for none of the belts and less money. Don't be dense.

no, because it would just be a defense of the ibf, densey denserson

sucracristo wrote:

zorndeslammes wrote:If Fury loses to Glazkov, Klitschko fights Fury then for none of the belts and less money. Don't be dense.

no, because it would just be a defense of the ibf, densey denserson

What makes you think the WBA, WBO, Ring Magazine, and IBO would keep Tyson Fury as their champ if he lost to Glazkov?

Only saving grace is Martin-Glaskov is a good match.


IBF title isn't worth a bucket of warm spit.

Its not their best decision, but I'm not too hard on IBF for doing so. Fury publicly stated he has like no interest whatsoever in fighting Glazkov and was disrespectful in promising to dump their belt into trashcan. Had he not done so, maybe they would negotiate prolongation of their mandatory defence.

A possibility is that the crooks like to get extra incentives, which they could have gotten from Duva, but refused by Fury. Maybe Klitschko would do some back-scretching too, had he won and wanted a rematch. But I think its more about their pride, since neither Glaskov nor Martin can generate big bucks.

Another issue is that Fury didn't care about the belt. He also said he'd better lose a belt had David Haye become his mandatory. Me thinks Fury's only goal is big money in short-term perspective. He probably realises he won't be on top for a long time and he doesn't really want too. He mentioned gaining like 30 pounds between fights, it must be tough to shed it each time.

According to Duva, they were ready to wait for Klitschko rematch but Fury team refused point blank. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03bm7n5

zorndeslammes wrote: What makes you think the WBA, WBO, Ring Magazine, and IBO would keep Tyson Fury as their champ if he lost to Glazkov?

are you seriously asking if the ibo would recognize a champ who had lost their ibf title?
of all the people to be calling others on this forum dense. you called someone dense,
got called out on your density, and then doubled down on your densdom.
scroll down the list of ibo titlists and ask that question again.
http://boxrec.com/title/champions

ring magazine? sorry to inform you that it is not a real title. it is a magazine that may or
may not still be in print that for the most part is relegated to a subsection of another domain
on the internet, possibly even partly owned by oscar de la hoya?

wba and wbo have recognized unified champs who lost other titles and i would say it depends
on how fury lost. the fact is that unified champs defend only one of their titles all the time,
and you don't seem to know that. i believe wlad had done it on occasion. ibf has recognized
former unified champs who had been stripped of their other titles. these belts have obviously
been making up their own rules and breaking them for decades now.

sucracristo wrote:

zorndeslammes wrote: What makes you think the WBA, WBO, Ring Magazine, and IBO would keep Tyson Fury as their champ if he lost to Glazkov?

are you seriously asking if the ibo would recognize a champ who had lost their ibf title?

I'm asking why I should believe that the aformentioned entities would choose to not recognize a heavyweight title fight involving their champion and would not do anything to his status as "champ". That's the question. I absolutely do not think they would. I see no evidence that they would. I seriously doubt the WBA or WBO would choose to keep Fury as a champ after losing his belt in a theoretical defeat to Glazkov either. You say they've done it? OK. Throw us some names of times the WBA, IBO, or WBO refused to recognize the result of a professional world championship boxing match and didn't either vacate the belt after or have it change hands. Please.

the fact is that unified champs defend only one of their titles all the time,
and you don't seem to know that.

When Zab Judah lost the WBC belt to Carlos Baldomir, what happened to his WBA belt? Go ahead. Provide me some facts. Explain that one. Bonus points: What happened to the IBF welterweight title after that fight?

This is even funnier when you stop to realize the only sanctioning body of the 4 Wladimir held belts to that might have had him keep the strap in losing a mandatory for a different body is the one that just stripped him. Not sure if you'll see that humor.

i believe wlad had done it on occasion.

Done what? Lost and retained a pile of titles? He was only a belt holder once before this run.

ibf has recognized
former unified champs who had been stripped of their other titles. these belts have obviously
been making up their own rules and breaking them for decades now.

That's how all the sanctioning bodies gained acceptance. Do you not remember when the WBO belt wasn't recognized? Enough good fighters held it that it gained acceptance. Only took 15-16 years.

^^^^^ WBO was born in the late 80's and if I remember right it was around 2004-2006 time frame when it reached equal footing with the WBA, WBC and WBO.

IBO still has a ways to go before it reaches the same level of recognition as the other four.

zorndeslammes wrote:

sucracristo wrote:

zorndeslammes wrote: What makes you think the WBA, WBO, Ring Magazine, and IBO would keep Tyson Fury as their champ if he lost to Glazkov?

are you seriously asking if the ibo would recognize a champ who had lost their ibf title?

I'm asking why I should believe that the aformentioned entities would choose to not recognize a heavyweight title fight involving their champion and would not do anything to his status as "champ".

ok, you're too lazy to go down the list of ibo champs even though the link was posted right there for you
and you just want to keep arguing this same nonsense. again, you are painfully dense and the last person
to be going on this board calling others dense. i'm done.

sucracristo wrote: ok, you're too lazy to go down the list of ibo champs even though the link was posted right there for you
and you just want to keep arguing this same nonsense. again, you are painfully dense and the last person
to be going on this board calling others dense. i'm done.

If I actually went through the list of IBO champs and listed when they won their belts and how many title fight losses they've had since in which the IBO allowed them to keep the belt anyways, I'd have a list of exactly zero fighters. I hope for your sake that you are done. You have no clue as to what you're talking about.

(Though, if you want to say "What about Lara?" I will enjoy that discussion immensely.)