Winner of Whyte-Rivas to become WBC mandatory challenger?

[Onetimeonly]

I don't particularly care. If wilder fought fury and the Josh/Ruiz winner that's better than whyte. I had more empathy for him before he turned down Joshua. I like him though.

[Enlightened-One]

The WBC have finally confirmed that the winner of the Whyte-Rivas bout will become the next mandatory challenger to Deontay Wilder’s world title, but they haven’t given a timescale for their title shot.

By the time Deontay Wilder face Luis Ortiz for the second time, he would have only engaged in two mandatory title defences in almost five years.

In case those of a rather sensitive nature believe I’m somehow being obscenely hateful towards the American, please consider the accuracy of my words beforehand.

[ewenhay]

Has Whyte not been wbc mandatory before?

[Enlightened-One]

Has Whyte not been wbc mandatory before?

Nope. By the time he faces Rivas, he would have been their highest rated contender for two years.

And despite that fact, the WBC mandated lesser lower rated fighters, like Breazeale-Molina to face each other for the mandatory title shot.

Bermane Stiverne, despite testing positive for banned substances, arguably losing to a journeyman and without engaging in a title eliminator, was also deemed worthy of becoming Deontay Wilder’s mandatory challenger.

Look at who Wilder has defended his title against and then compare their world championship title challenger credentials to Dillian Whyte’s.

[oogiebe]

Has Whyte not been wbc mandatory before?

Nope. By the time he faces Rivas, he would have been their highest rated contender for two years.

And despite that fact, the WBC mandated lesser lower rated fighters, like Breazeale-Molina to face each other for the mandatory title shot.

Bermane Stiverne, despite testing positive for banned substances, arguably losing to a journeyman and without engaging in a title eliminator, was also deemed worthy of becoming Deontay Wilder’s mandatory challenger.

Look at who Wilder has defended his title against and then compare their world championship title challenger credentials to Dillian Whyte’s.

LOL! Maybe Whyte should have accepted his shot at AJ or one of the mandatory eliminator fights he turned down! He'll lose to Rivas anyway.

[Enlightened-One]

Nope. By the time he faces Rivas, he would have been their highest rated contender for two years.

And despite that fact, the WBC mandated lesser lower rated fighters, like Breazeale-Molina to face each other for the mandatory title shot.

Bermane Stiverne, despite testing positive for banned substances, arguably losing to a journeyman and without engaging in a title eliminator, was also deemed worthy of becoming Deontay Wilder’s mandatory challenger.

Look at who Wilder has defended his title against and then compare their world championship title challenger credentials to Dillian Whyte’s.

LOL! Maybe Whyte should have accepted his shot at AJ or one of the mandatory eliminator fights he turned down! He'll lose to Rivas anyway.

LOL! Maybe you wouldn’t have said that had you known that Whyte was due to receive less to face Joshua than he received to face Chisora, which Eddie Hearn confirmed, but your ignorance won’t concede that rather simple trivial piece of information!

Do you honestly think I’m wrong and can’t prove this?

Please tell me I’m lying?

[oogiebe]

LOL! Maybe Whyte should have accepted his shot at AJ or one of the mandatory eliminator fights he turned down! He'll lose to Rivas anyway.

LOL! Maybe you wouldn’t have said that had you known that Whyte was due to receive less to face Joshua than he received to face Chisora, which Eddie Hearn confirmed, but your ignorance won’t concede!

LMFAO!!! You still taking Hearn as gospel? Calling me ignorant won't change anything. You are a fanboy and a Wilder hater. You are so redundant it's pathetic. Delooooooooosional.

[Enlightened-One]

LOL! Maybe you wouldn’t have said that had you known that Whyte was due to receive less to face Joshua than he received to face Chisora, which Eddie Hearn confirmed, but your ignorance won’t concede!

LMFAO!!! You still taking Hearn as gospel? Calling me ignorant won't change anything. You are a fanboy and a Wilder hater. You are so redundant it's pathetic. Delooooooooosional.

So in other words, you can’t prove me wrong.

Therefore, you resort to an ad hominem attack.

[oogiebe]

LMFAO!!! You still taking Hearn as gospel? Calling me ignorant won't change anything. You are a fanboy and a Wilder hater. You are so redundant it's pathetic. Delooooooooosional.

So in other words, you can’t prove me wrong.

Therefore, you resort to an ad hominem attack.

You can't prove yourself right! You quote a promoter as gospel! Don't you follow boxing? All you do is regurgitate youtube videos.

[Enlightened-One]

So in other words, you can’t prove me wrong.

Therefore, you resort to an ad hominem attack.

You can't prove yourself right! You quote a promoter as gospel! Don't you follow boxing? All you do is regurgitate youtube videos.

I can prove what I wrote. You can’t disprove any of my claims.

You haven’t even tried, because you know you can’t.

Shock me and let’s see you try!

[oogiebe]

You can't prove yourself right! You quote a promoter as gospel! Don't you follow boxing? All you do is regurgitate youtube videos.

I can prove what I wrote. You can’t disprove any of my claims.

You haven’t even tried, because you know you can’t.

Shock me and let’s see you try!

"Prove me wrong!" LOL! You haven't proved anything at all. Hyperbole only. It's on you. I'm not ever going to believe Eddie Hearn like you do. No one would. Maybe another time you can be right. But not this time.

[Enlightened-One]

I can prove what I wrote. You can’t disprove any of my claims.

You haven’t even tried, because you know you can’t.

Shock me and let’s see you try!

"Prove me wrong!" LOL! You haven't proved anything at all. Hyperbole only. It's on you. I'm not ever going to believe Eddie Hearn like you do. No one would. Maybe another time you can be right. But not this time.

I have previously provided loads of evidence to substantiate my claims, which you constantly declined to refute.

I’m under no obligation to keep reposting the same proof over-and-over again for you to ultimately keep ignoring.

If you think I’m wrong, prove otherwise or forever remain silent!

[oogiebe]

"Prove me wrong!" LOL! You haven't proved anything at all. Hyperbole only. It's on you. I'm not ever going to believe Eddie Hearn like you do. No one would. Maybe another time you can be right. But not this time.

I have previously provided loads of evidence to substantiate my claims, which you constantly declined to refute.

I’m under no obligation to keep reposting the same proof over-and-over again for you to ultimately keep ignoring.

If you think I’m wrong, prove otherwise or forever remain silent!

You made statements with no backup. Your only 'proof' is that Eddie Hearn confirmed it. Not the best approach sonny.

[Enlightened-One]

I have previously provided loads of evidence to substantiate my claims, which you constantly declined to refute.

I’m under no obligation to keep reposting the same proof over-and-over again for you to ultimately keep ignoring.

If you think I’m wrong, prove otherwise or forever remain silent!

You made statements with no backup. Your only 'proof' is that Eddie Hearn confirmed it. Not the best approach sonny.

You provided no proof whatsoever of your own beliefs and constantly refuse to do so.

[oogiebe]

You made statements with no backup. Your only 'proof' is that Eddie Hearn confirmed it. Not the best approach sonny.

You provided no proof whatsoever of your own beliefs and constantly refuse to do so.

I have to prove that something didn't happen??? You made the statements that Wilder is ducking Whyte. WTF?! You are a silly boy.

[Enlightened-One]

You provided no proof whatsoever of your own beliefs and constantly refuse to do so.

I have to prove that something didn't happen??? You made the statements that Wilder is ducking Whyte. WTF?! You are a silly boy.

When others provide proof of something that did happen in the real-world, you can’t dismiss it, simply because it doesn’t adhere to your preferred perception of reality.

You can’t prove your dreams, but I can prove my words.

You won’t even bother trying to prove anything!

[oogiebe]

I have to prove that something didn't happen??? You made the statements that Wilder is ducking Whyte. WTF?! You are a silly boy.

When others provide proof of something that did happen in the real-world, you can’t dismiss it, simply because it doesn’t adhere to your preferred perception of reality.

You can’t prove your dreams, but I can prove my words.

You won’t even bother trying to prove anything!

What dreams?

[Finkel]

Seems Teddy Atlas has just covered this on his podcast

[Cent0089]

Its only me, but that undercard is realy stacked?? Seems good

[Onetimeonly]

So in other words, you can’t prove me wrong.

Therefore, you resort to an ad hominem attack.

You can't prove yourself right! You quote a promoter as gospel! Don't you follow boxing? All you do is regurgitate youtube videos.

Don't forget copy and paste!

[oogiebe]

You can't prove yourself right! You quote a promoter as gospel! Don't you follow boxing? All you do is regurgitate youtube videos.

Don't forget copy and paste!

...and that!