BoxRec

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 06:46 The 10lbs rehydration clause for the Canelo-Fielding bout is nothing but a storm in a teacup.

Rocky Fielding didn’t need to employ acute/drastic dehydration weight loss techniques for his bout against Tyron Zeuge.

The Brit supposedly doesn’t enter camp massively overweight, he remains at a sensible weight and he only tends to lose weight during the final ten days of training. He apparently doesn’t put on much more than ten pounds between the official weigh-in’s and fight night anyway.

Both Eddie Hearn and Rocky Fielding have downplayed the significance of the rehydration clause when they claimed that they “weren’t bothered” about it. And if that’s really the case, then neither should we be.

Um ok why is it in there then? What’s the worry? What’s the necessity? Why can’t we complain that Canelo prohibits his opponents being at their potential best even if it May not manifest.

jamamb wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 06:29 same guys complaining of rehydration clause probably go on about how poor ggg was only a natural mw fighting so much bigger guys. but omg danny weighed 250 pounds on fight day, thats why he skipped 2nd weigh in!

'probably': do they though, really? or do you just really like to have the chance to say 'man on internet says A and it doesn't match with when he also said B', I mean you like it so much, you say 'man on internet says A and he's probably saying B as well (whether or not he actually is)', you're not even doing it to real actual people and real actual posters at this point, you're accusing hypothetical people of hypothetical hypocrisy FFS!

dude when it's specific people in specific instances saying one thing and then contradicting themselves, fine pick up on it, but FFS, are you really at the point where every 'A' any 'man says on the internet' just gets equivocated with 'ah but he probably said B as well'? like lazy says man, take a break from the 'picking up on internet contradictions', its like this kneejerk twitch with you and you can't help it, 'take a moment to evaluate your statements everyone, the internet hypocrisy detector has been triggered in jamamb'

oh ive already seen it bruh ,, its around many places i only say probablyh here because im a highly considerate poster and i havent seen talk or even much recognition of knowledge of the weight clause

its a common inconsistency, ppl complain about guys being weight bullys and draining for divisions, but then when this type of clause is in effect its 'a side diva!'

its not just about ggg or canelo rreally, just about #keepingitreal

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 06:57Um ok why is it in there then? What’s the worry? What’s the necessity?

It’s normal for any promoter, like Golden Boy, to feel compelled to reduce the risk and to be naturally cautious when their most-prized asset chooses to compete outside their natural habitat, such as moving up a weight division.

If you’ve ever had multiple employers in your life, you’ll surely realise that the employment contracts you’re obliged to sign for each role you’ve been employed in usually contain different terms.

Different situations with different risks usually results in different stipulations being detailed in different contracts - it's normal.

Eddie Hearn and Rocky Fielding both claim they aren’t “bothered” about the rehydration clause and they don’t have any concerns about making weight, so we shouldn’t be concerned either.

Let’s not forget that the vast majority of GGG die-hards were utterly outraged by Danny Jacobs’ refusal to adhere to the IBF second day weigh-in rules, despite there not being a rehydration clause in the fight contract, coupled with the fact that the American was only the mandatory challenger for the WBA strap.

So the very same set of fight fans are willing to voice their outrage due to the absence of a rehydration clause for their “hero” Gennady Golovkin, but yet they become equally infuriated when one is included for a bout involving the “villainous” Canelo Alvarez!

Is this another example of the phrase “double standards”?

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 06:57Why can’t we complain that Canelo prohibits his opponents being at their potential best even if it May not manifest.

It’s impossible for me to prevent you from complaining over trivial matters. It is clearly your prerogative to “make mountains out of molehills” for “storm in a teacup” type situations.

That being said, based on Fielding’s own words, the Brit doesn’t struggle making the 168lbs weight limit and there is a lack of evidence proving any accusations of Canelo forcing Rocky to compete at sub-optimal levels.

You’re welcome to whinge and moan about this situation as much as you like, but I’ve actually chosen to pay attention to the people affected by the rehydration clause, instead of complaining for the sake of it!

Smh not reading that.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:24 Smh not reading that.

You asked questions and I answered them.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:27

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:24 Smh not reading that.

You asked questions and I answered them.

Just answer them in a couple of sentences...spare me the essay.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:34

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:27

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:24 Smh not reading that.

You asked questions and I answered them.

Just answer them in a couple of sentences...spare me the essay.

Every sentence I wrote details a unique point. I listed a lot of perfectly valid points, but to keep things simple for you - your complaints about the Canelo-Fielding rehydration clause aren’t justified.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:45

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:34

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:27
You asked questions and I answered them.

Just answer them in a couple of sentences...spare me the essay.

Every sentence I wrote details a unique point. I listed a lot of perfectly valid points, but to keep things simple for you - your complaints about the Canelo-Fielding rehydration clause aren’t justified.

They are. If Canelo ever fights c smith. Smith you can’t rehydrate, why? even fielding agreed to this, it’s how it is, sign or no fight as this is the standard.

But Canelo the super middleweight who masquerades as a sww....no....he can rehydrate.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:54

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:45

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:34

Just answer them in a couple of sentences...spare me the essay.

Every sentence I wrote details a unique point. I listed a lot of perfectly valid points, but to keep things simple for you - your complaints about the Canelo-Fielding rehydration clause aren’t justified.

They are. If Canelo ever fights c smith. Smith you can’t rehydrate, why? even fielding agreed to this, it’s how it is, sign or no fight as this is the standard.

But Canelo the super middleweight who masquerades as a sww....no....he can rehydrate.

You seriously can’t complain about a potential rehydration clause for a fictional bout between Canelo and Smith that currently only exists in your mind.

The only thing we currently know for certain is that the 10lbs rehydration clause is considered as a non-issue for Rocky Fielding’s handlers.

It’s up to Callum Smith to decide whether or not to agree to a similar rehydration clause if Golden Boy offers him an opportunity to face Canelo.

And until that happens, no one has any reason to complain yet.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 09:15

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:54

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:45
Every sentence I wrote details a unique point. I listed a lot of perfectly valid points, but to keep things simple for you - your complaints about the Canelo-Fielding rehydration clause aren’t justified.

They are. If Canelo ever fights c smith. Smith you can’t rehydrate, why? even fielding agreed to this, it’s how it is, sign or no fight as this is the standard.

But Canelo the super middleweight who masquerades as a sww....no....he can rehydrate.

You seriously can’t complain about a potential rehydration clause for a fictional bout between Canelo and Smith that currently only exists in your mind.

The only thing we currently know for certain is that the 10lbs rehydration clause is considered as a non-issue for Rocky Fielding’s handlers.

It’s up to Callum Smith to decide whether or not to agree to a similar rehydration clause if Golden Boy offers him an opportunity to face Canelo.

And until that happens, no one has any reason to complain yet.

Things don’t happen in isolation. He’s aleeady pulling this weight clause now and unnecessary as you have surmised. You don’t think he’ll pull it in the future? This is the template.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 09:34

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 09:15

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 08:54

They are. If Canelo ever fights c smith. Smith you can’t rehydrate, why? even fielding agreed to this, it’s how it is, sign or no fight as this is the standard.

But Canelo the super middleweight who masquerades as a sww....no....he can rehydrate.

You seriously can’t complain about a potential rehydration clause for a fictional bout between Canelo and Smith that currently only exists in your mind.

The only thing we currently know for certain is that the 10lbs rehydration clause is considered as a non-issue for Rocky Fielding’s handlers.

It’s up to Callum Smith to decide whether or not to agree to a similar rehydration clause if Golden Boy offers him an opportunity to face Canelo.

And until that happens, no one has any reason to complain yet.

Things don’t happen in isolation. He’s aleeady pulling this weight clause now and unnecessary as you have surmised. You don’t think he’ll pull it in the future? This is the template.

Of course, Canelo can potentially request the inclusion of rehydration or catch-weight clauses within any fight contracts for any future super-middleweight bouts.

It’s up to each opponent to decide whether or not to agree to such stipulations based on how it would affect their ability to perform inside the ring. And we should only comment on a case-by-case basis, based on the feedback each fighter provides for their specific situation.

We do know that Fielding has worked with leading boxing nutritionist James Morehen and his team at Liverpool University for his last ten bouts to improve the manner in which he cuts weight.

I can provide you links to at least two articles explaining how Rocky Fielding manages to make weight with ease via the use of a scientific plan.

If the Brit’s team are being honest when they claim they aren’t “bothered” about the rehydration clause, then we shouldn’t be either.

You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

All of this A side preferantial treatment. It is a big turn off

tiny_acres wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:03

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

All of this A side preferantial treatment. It is a big turn off

Yeah they're all following the Mayweather blueprint nowadays

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

Boxing has been like this for years though and Canelo didn't pioneer the concepts of catchweights and rehydration clauses either.

If Rocky Fielding found Canelo's contractual demands so abhorrent and unreasonable, then he shouldn't have taken the fight.

As it turned out though, Rocky Fielding doesn't struggle to make the super-middleweight limit and he claims he isn't "bothered" one iota about the 10lbs rehydration clause.

So fight fans shouldn't be outraged about a trivial matter that doesn't affect either fighter.

If you want to discuss Canelo's failed drug test, then create a completely different thread, as this has absolutely fûck all to do with the Rocky Fielding 10lbs rehydration clause!

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

Exactly plus he’s a pound for pound top 10 fighter. Who else in that 10 is modifying the rules. Weight climbers like Crawford are relying on transferable skills and natural size adjustments rather than contract clauses.

This makes it exciting as there’s now the challenge of size...obviously not the best example with Crawford as he’s already a decently sized ww.

Anyway this modifying will continue and the advantage Canelo got at the lighter weights won’t be allowed agaisnt him. Ironic if that’s the right word for it.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:29

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

Boxing has been like this for years though and Canelo didn't pioneer the concepts of catchweights and rehydration clauses either.

If Rocky Fielding found Canelo's contractual demands so abhorrent and unreasonable, then he shouldn't have taken the fight.

As it turned out though, Rocky Fielding doesn't struggle to make the super-middleweight limit and he claims he isn't "bothered" one iota about the 10lbs rehydration clause.

So fight fans shouldn't be outraged about a trivial matter that doesn't affect either fighter.

If you want to discuss Canelo's failed drug test, then create a completely different thread, as this has absolutely fûck all to do with the Rocky Fielding 10lbs rehydration clause!

You’re saying it’s common? What pound for pound top 10s are doing this now? Think that’s a good place to start as p4ps usually have gone through a few weights.

If it is common I stand corrected.

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:06

tiny_acres wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:03

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

All of this A side preferantial treatment. It is a big turn off

Yeah they're all following the Mayweather blueprint nowadays

I hate to burst the I hate Floyd bubble.
But sugar Ray Leonard do this 25 years before Floyd.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:40

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:29

ewenhay wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 16:54 You've missed the point though. He's challenging Fielding for his title but insisting on rules which aren't those specified by the governing body. You can see surely why people don't like that attitude.

Especially from someone who recently failed his drug test

Boxing has been like this for years though and Canelo didn't pioneer the concepts of catchweights and rehydration clauses either.

If Rocky Fielding found Canelo's contractual demands so abhorrent and unreasonable, then he shouldn't have taken the fight.

As it turned out though, Rocky Fielding doesn't struggle to make the super-middleweight limit and he claims he isn't "bothered" one iota about the 10lbs rehydration clause.

So fight fans shouldn't be outraged about a trivial matter that doesn't affect either fighter.

If you want to discuss Canelo's failed drug test, then create a completely different thread, as this has absolutely fûck all to do with the Rocky Fielding 10lbs rehydration clause!

You’re saying it’s common? What pound for pound top 10s are doing this now? Think that’s a good place to start as p4ps usually have gone through a few weights.

If it is common I stand corrected.

Stick to the point, the topic actually being discussed, whilst ensuring that you're challenging the words I really wrote, not a bizarrely and dishonestly misrepresented version of my stance!

If you can't do this one simple thing then you're a fûckîng prîck, because it proves you can't debate honestly!

FFS! There's some fûckîng dumb twàts that frequent this place!

People that can't fûckîng read arguing with me! One of the worst straw man's I've ever encountered!

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 19:25

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:40

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:29
Boxing has been like this for years though and Canelo didn't pioneer the concepts of catchweights and rehydration clauses either.

If Rocky Fielding found Canelo's contractual demands so abhorrent and unreasonable, then he shouldn't have taken the fight.

As it turned out though, Rocky Fielding doesn't struggle to make the super-middleweight limit and he claims he isn't "bothered" one iota about the 10lbs rehydration clause.

So fight fans shouldn't be outraged about a trivial matter that doesn't affect either fighter.

If you want to discuss Canelo's failed drug test, then create a completely different thread, as this has absolutely fûck all to do with the Rocky Fielding 10lbs rehydration clause!

You’re saying it’s common? What pound for pound top 10s are doing this now? Think that’s a good place to start as p4ps usually have gone through a few weights.

If it is common I stand corrected.

Stick to the point, the topic actually being discussed, whilst ensuring that you're challenging the words I really wrote, not a bizarrely and dishonestly misrepresented version of my stance!

If you can't do this one simple thing then you're a fûckîng prîck, because it proves you can't debate honestly!

FFS! There's some fûckîng dumb twàts that frequent this place!

People that can't fûckîng read arguing with me! One of the worst straw man's I've ever encountered!

You are so limited, I feel sorry for you. You can’t keep up with the discussion. The topic is/was the weight clause. Did you realise?

So I can’t get upset but you need to keep your emotions in check. Emotional one lol.

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 20:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 19:25

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 17:40

You’re saying it’s common? What pound for pound top 10s are doing this now? Think that’s a good place to start as p4ps usually have gone through a few weights.

If it is common I stand corrected.

Stick to the point, the topic actually being discussed, whilst ensuring that you're challenging the words I really wrote, not a bizarrely and dishonestly misrepresented version of my stance!

If you can't do this one simple thing then you're a fûckîng prîck, because it proves you can't debate honestly!

FFS! There's some fûckîng dumb twàts that frequent this place!

People that can't fûckîng read arguing with me! One of the worst straw man's I've ever encountered!

You are so limited, I feel sorry for you. You can’t keep up with the discussion. The topic is/was the weight clause. Did you realise?

So I can’t get upset but you need to keep your emotions in check. Emotional one lol.

You either that dumb where don't even realise what you did or you're pretending that you didn't employ a straw man?

So which one is it?

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 20:11

lazboy wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 20:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑22 Oct 2018, 19:25
Stick to the point, the topic actually being discussed, whilst ensuring that you're challenging the words I really wrote, not a bizarrely and dishonestly misrepresented version of my stance!

If you can't do this one simple thing then you're a fûckîng prîck, because it proves you can't debate honestly!

FFS! There's some fûckîng dumb twàts that frequent this place!

People that can't fûckîng read arguing with me! One of the worst straw man's I've ever encountered!

You are so limited, I feel sorry for you. You can’t keep up with the discussion. The topic is/was the weight clause. Did you realise?

So I can’t get upset but you need to keep your emotions in check. Emotional one lol.

You either that dumb where don't even realise what you did or you're pretending that you didn't employ a straw man?

So which one is it?

I’d like to make an amendment, option 3, your too dumb to follow a discussion. That’s
The option I chose.

Re-reading all of it. What is wrong with you. There was no ground to make such an emotional attacking response. My advice - make your malfunction known so people have some understanding otherwise you’ll keep getting tripped up by people able to argue/discuss with depth.

And then to not understand the flow of the conversation is baffling.I’ve had to remind you we are talking about a rehydration clause. What do you think the topic is? It’s a uncommon and onerous clause. I’ve elaborated on the point. I’ve asked you whether you think it’s common. Point me to the pound for pound boxer(s) that take advantage of it. You were unable to answer.

All you waffles was a superficial explanation of an employment contract but with no context to the onerous and uncommon clause. Then you made the assumption that fielding won’t be affected by the clause. The biggest fight of his life surely he will be training the hardest he ever has, you completely rule him out of benefiting from any additional weight.

Further you say that if he didn’t like the clause he should have just negotiated or not fought Canelo. Are you familiar with bargaining power, are you aware that Canelo is the lottery ticket of today. You think fielding would just turn this down? Are you aware of the relationship between bargaining power and unfair contract terms.

So basically what you have said is: Canelo can do this and fielding didn’t have to accept. That’s it. Pretty simple stuff there. Of course people are allowed to express their opinions regarding the inequality. Won’t do us much good but it’s a talking point and if you’re a gambler it’s relevant. No idea why you went on your tirade. I’ll repeat this again - make known your affliction.

Smh not reading that.

Fȕck¡ng strawman bµllsh¡t nonsense!