BoxRec

Wilder vs Stiverne is a FARCE

Ossyrules wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 16:40

Badhusker wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 16:27

punchoutsb wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 13:41 It's worse than that...he was the mandatory BEFORE Ortiz's failed test. He accepted step aside money for Ortiz.

I wish Joshua had the boys to tell Hearn he wants to fight Wilder. Wilder paid $600 K out of his own pocket to fight Ortiz. Joshua would never even mention Ortiz's name. In fact he objected to him being a mandatory for him though WBA so he could fight Pulev.

Make the best guys fight each other.

Joshua was tied to the IBF mandatory should Wlad not have the rematch. This had to be fulfilled

Badhusker wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 13:47

Ossyrules wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 16:40

Badhusker wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 16:27

I wish Joshua had the boys to tell Hearn he wants to fight Wilder. Wilder paid $600 K out of his own pocket to fight Ortiz. Joshua would never even mention Ortiz's name. In fact he objected to him being a mandatory for him though WBA so he could fight Pulev.

Make the best guys fight each other.

Joshua was tied to the IBF mandatory should Wlad not have the rematch. This had to be fulfilled

It had no more significance than Joshua fighting Ortiz, as the WBA mandatory was established first. They let him go through with it anyway because if he didn't fight Pulev they would have stripped him. Its not like one mandatory trumps another automatically. Its obvious now they knew Pulev would pull out, because he refused to fight AJ before. Belts matter when it is convenient I guess.

Ossyrules wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 14:36

Badhusker wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 13:47

Ossyrules wrote: ↑04 Nov 2017, 16:40

Joshua was tied to the IBF mandatory should Wlad not have the rematch. This had to be fulfilled

It had no more significance than Joshua fighting Ortiz, as the WBA mandatory was established first. They let him go through with it anyway because if he didn't fight Pulev they would have stripped him. Its not like one mandatory trumps another automatically. Its obvious now they knew Pulev would pull out, because he refused to fight AJ before. Belts matter when it is convenient I guess.

Happy to be educated by you, but how was the WBA mandatory established first? He didn’t even hold that belt prior to Wlad...

The belts matter if he wants to unify the division. If you truly do t think a belt matters get your boy wilder to dump his belt in the trash like Bowe, then come get a shot at joshua

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

Ossyrules wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 14:36

Badhusker wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 13:47 It had no more significance than Joshua fighting Ortiz, as the WBA mandatory was established first. They let him go through with it anyway because if he didn't fight Pulev they would have stripped him. Its not like one mandatory trumps another automatically. Its obvious now they knew Pulev would pull out, because he refused to fight AJ before. Belts matter when it is convenient I guess.

Happy to be educated by you, but how was the WBA mandatory established first? He didn’t even hold that belt prior to Wlad...

The belts matter if he wants to unify the division. If you truly do t think a belt matters get your boy wilder to dump his belt in the trash like Bowe, then come get a shot at joshua

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:08

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

Ossyrules wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 14:36

Happy to be educated by you, but how was the WBA mandatory established first? He didn’t even hold that belt prior to Wlad...

The belts matter if he wants to unify the division. If you truly do t think a belt matters get your boy wilder to dump his belt in the trash like Bowe, then come get a shot at joshua

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

What's the belt worth if everybody knows it belongs to Povetkin?

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:36

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:08

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

What's the belt worth if everybody knows it belongs to Povetkin?

Let the grown ups talk.

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:37

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:36

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:08
What's the belt worth if everybody knows it belongs to Povetkin?

Let the grown ups talk.

I just spoke

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:37

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:36

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:08
What's the belt worth if everybody knows it belongs to Povetkin?

Let the grown ups talk.

I just spoke

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:46

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:37

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:36
Let the grown ups talk.

I just spoke

And for your information Povetkin is no longer rated by the WBC. Why because he is suspended for drugs

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:20

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:46

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:37
I just spoke

And for your information Povetkin is no longer rated by the WBC. Why because he is suspended for drugs

The WBC don't rate him any more indeed, because they protect Wilder, he's not suspended for drugs. Povetkin never did anything that wasn't allowed. Grow up kid, face it, Povetkin was too much for them and appearantly still is.

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:37

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:20

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 22:46

And for your information Povetkin is no longer rated by the WBC. Why because he is suspended for drugs

The WBC don't rate him any more indeed, because they protect Wilder, he's not suspended for drugs. Povetkin never did anything that wasn't allowed. Grow up kid, face it, Povetkin was too much for them and appearantly still is.

Suspended for failed drug tests. Period the freaking end

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:21

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:37

asdfjkl wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:20
The WBC don't rate him any more indeed, because they protect Wilder, he's not suspended for drugs. Povetkin never did anything that wasn't allowed. Grow up kid, face it, Povetkin was too much for them and appearantly still is.

Suspended for failed drug tests. Period the freaking end

That's not what their rankings say

punchoutsb wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:25

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:21

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 23:37

Suspended for failed drug tests. Period the freaking end

That's not what their rankings say

Povetkin is not ranked by the WBC.

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:30

punchoutsb wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:25

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:21
That's not what their rankings say

Povetkin is not ranked by the WBC.

Exactly, while people that aren't on the list while they should be have a * next to their name and have the reason with it why they aren't ranked, unless they simply aren't good enough according to the WBC.

punchoutsb wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:36

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:30

punchoutsb wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:25

Povetkin is not ranked by the WBC.

Exactly, while people that aren't on the list while they should be have a * next to their name and have the reason with it why they aren't ranked, unless they simply aren't good enough according to the WBC.

He was suspended indefinitely in March.

As of August:

"Povetkin cannot be returned to the ratings so far," WBC President Mauricio Suleiman said, "We continue to consider his appeal, we are in touch with his lawyer. Accordingly, the suspension remains. "

per: https://ringside24.com/en/20833-world-b ... etkin-case

So yes, he is still suspended.

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:44

punchoutsb wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:36

asdfjkl wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 00:30
Exactly, while people that aren't on the list while they should be have a * next to their name and have the reason with it why they aren't ranked, unless they simply aren't good enough according to the WBC.

He was suspended indefinitely in March.

As of August:

"Povetkin cannot be returned to the ratings so far," WBC President Mauricio Suleiman said, "We continue to consider his appeal, we are in touch with his lawyer. Accordingly, the suspension remains. "

per: https://ringside24.com/en/20833-world-b ... etkin-case

So yes, he is still suspended.

If they still stick with that till the day of today, then that proves all over again how corrupt Wilder his connections are. Real champs shouldn't want any of this business, I hope AJ or Parker dare to face Povetkin.

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

Ossyrules wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 14:36

Badhusker wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 13:47

It had no more significance than Joshua fighting Ortiz, as the WBA mandatory was established first. They let him go through with it anyway because if he didn't fight Pulev they would have stripped him. Its not like one mandatory trumps another automatically. Its obvious now they knew Pulev would pull out, because he refused to fight AJ before. Belts matter when it is convenient I guess.

Happy to be educated by you, but how was the WBA mandatory established first? He didn’t even hold that belt prior to Wlad...

The belts matter if he wants to unify the division. If you truly do t think a belt matters get your boy wilder to dump his belt in the trash like Bowe, then come get a shot at joshua

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

Ossyrules wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 01:25

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

Ossyrules wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 14:36

Happy to be educated by you, but how was the WBA mandatory established first? He didn’t even hold that belt prior to Wlad...

The belts matter if he wants to unify the division. If you truly do t think a belt matters get your boy wilder to dump his belt in the trash like Bowe, then come get a shot at joshua

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

I don’t believe he should ditch the belt, that would be crazy. I’m just calling out a poster who seems to be massively anti Joshua and living on the fact that Joshua should ditch his belts to be free to make big fights. Of course when I reversed that statement onto his beloved wilder he types no reply. As it would be mental to ditch there belts

Badhusker wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 18:20

Ossyrules wrote: ↑06 Nov 2017, 01:25

tiny_acres wrote: ↑05 Nov 2017, 19:09

And when he throws the belt in the trash he loses potential bargaining material in the Joshua fight.
The belt is only a chip in the negotiations.

I don’t believe he should ditch the belt, that would be crazy. I’m just calling out a poster who seems to be massively anti Joshua and living on the fact that Joshua should ditch his belts to be free to make big fights. Of course when I reversed that statement onto his beloved wilder he types no reply. As it would be mental to ditch there belts

Joshua said he didn't care about the belts at one time, Wilder never said that. I pointed out that it is important to Joshua about hanging onto the belts when it is convenient to do so, which is the truth. You have to be an idiot to think Wilder would ditch his one and only belt for any reason. It makes no sense.

Badhusker wrote: ↑07 Nov 2017, 07:40 I guess it doesn't matter what Wilder wants, or the fans. Hearn doesn't want them to fight, so they might as well line up someone else.

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2017/11/fin ... hua-fight/