Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post Reply
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by danamba7 »

I know this is old news but why have they turned a very good, unifying fight into less of a good fight with no belts on the line!?
Datsue
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by Datsue »

It's 'cos of the PBC Reality TV show thing, isn't it? They don't mention any belt but the PBC one (arf-arf-arf-arf). Haymon's basically trying to make himself into Dana White (& I don't mean that in a racist kinda way).
GlobalBox
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2037
Joined: 10 Jun 2007, 02:57

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by GlobalBox »

Is it definately only a ten round bout as well, Garcia cant do 140 anymore I think thats the reason and he is heading upto 147 but clearly not with any great haste so not sure how much the struggle is but sometimes those last couple of pounds are the worst, still is this really only 10 rounds, it should be a 12 rounder even if not for the belt surely.
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by danamba7 »

Datsue wrote:It's 'cos of the PBC Reality TV show thing, isn't it? They don't mention any belt but the PBC one (arf-arf-arf-arf). Haymon's basically trying to make himself into Dana White (& I don't mean that in a racist kinda way).
I'm surprised there isn't more of an uproar about this. We all want the World Champs to fight each other and unify the belts but in this case we get the fight but both get to keep their belts no matter what! :confused: And only 10 rounds :neutral:
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by danamba7 »

GlobalBox wrote:Is it definately only a ten round bout as well, Garcia cant do 140 anymore I think thats the reason and he is heading upto 147 but clearly not with any great haste so not sure how much the struggle is but sometimes those last couple of pounds are the worst, still is this really only 10 rounds, it should be a 12 rounder even if not for the belt surely.
"A 10X3 MINUTE ROUNDS CONTEST AT A 143LBS CATCHWEIGHT"

Taken from BN website. Not sure if that's reliable though!
hitman_hatton1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6150
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by hitman_hatton1 »

pathetic ain't it.

all these weight divisions and they still wanna clock in between the f*cking weights.

if the fighters can't be bothered then why should we.
broomy7s
Cruiserweight
Posts: 971
Joined: 19 May 2011, 07:53

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by broomy7s »

Both should be stripped immediately.
Boxing Prospect
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 6592
Joined: 25 Jun 2012, 14:35

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by Boxing Prospect »

Funny to think we could have Cuenca Vs Ik Yang for the IBF belt if they decide to strip Peterson...
ScottDetonator
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Mar 2011, 04:33

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by ScottDetonator »

That means Garcia won't have defended his WBC title since March last year but will have had two fights on TV?

Also, what about the Lee vs Quillin title fight? I'm guessing it won't be announced as a World title fight either, same as Thurman-Guerrero, but it will still be for the title.

If I remember right, Peterson vs Matthysse was at a catch weight of 141, meaning Peterson, once again, kept his belt. Someone really wants Peterson to keep that belt.

Seems to just confuse the sport even more for the casual fans, not good at all IMO. You've got a belt, defend it or vacate. If you can't make the weight, move up and vacate. Two guys both fighting at 3lbs over the weight so they can both keep their belts?

A disappointment on what looked to be a promising fight for the division, clouded by under-hand crap, that keeps the money trains rolling. Basically, it's corruption or at the very least, it is taking the fans as mugs.
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by danamba7 »

ScottDetonator wrote:That means Garcia won't have defended his WBC title since March last year but will have had two fights on TV?

Also, what about the Lee vs Quillin title fight? I'm guessing it won't be announced as a World title fight either, same as Thurman-Guerrero, but it will still be for the title.

If I remember right, Peterson vs Matthysse was at a catch weight of 141, meaning Peterson, once again, kept his belt. Someone really wants Peterson to keep that belt.

Seems to just confuse the sport even more for the casual fans, not good at all IMO. You've got a belt, defend it or vacate. If you can't make the weight, move up and vacate. Two guys both fighting at 3lbs over the weight so they can both keep their belts?

A disappointment on what looked to be a promising fight for the division, clouded by under-hand crap, that keeps the money trains rolling. Basically, it's corruption or at the very least, it is taking the fans as mugs.
Completely agree.
ILikeBeer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 10947
Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 07:23

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by ILikeBeer »

Remember when boxing used to be a sport?
Andrew
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 6108
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 09:31

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by Andrew »

Disgraceful both should be stripped.

Cheaterson should have been stripped of the IBF belt over 3 yrs ago when the WBA stopped him for the failed drugs test against Khan.

Then he didn't fight for 15 months got smashed by Matthysse at 1lb over and is still IBF champ. Must have them in his back pocket as they are known to be ruthless with mandatories just ask Jamie McDonnell.
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 23240
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by handsofstone »

I brought this up on CS last week and was crucified,I despise the antics of the alphabets as much as the next man but I wanted to see a unification fight as it just might bring us a step closer to an undisputed champ

If they can't make weight then vacate,either shit or get off the pot,as they say on boxrec forum

Most people were on CS saying "who cares about shitty ABC titles,as long as we have good match ups". Well for a start in a title fight we would have 12 rounds,also this may be a good fight but seeing as its a CW,we'll still be nowhere nearer to finding out who the man is at 140
expe
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6871
Joined: 07 Oct 2012, 10:10

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by expe »

handsofstone wrote:I brought this up on CS last week and was crucified,I despise the antics of the alphabets as much as the next man but I wanted to see a unification fight as it just might bring us a step closer to an undisputed champ

If they can't make weight then vacate,either poo or get off the pot,as they say on boxrec forum

Most people were on CS saying "who cares about shitty ABC titles,as long as we have good match ups". Well for a start in a title fight we would have 12 rounds,also this may be a good fight but seeing as its a CW,we'll still be nowhere nearer to finding out who the man is at 140
It's amazing the amount of posters on CS who are well into all this PBC shite, some of them are usually good posters too and it's got them talking complete bollocks.
Horse
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 22335
Joined: 03 Jul 2005, 17:09

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by Horse »

Peterson is the most ridiculous world champion in boxing.

He should be stripped if he loses.
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by danamba7 »

handsofstone wrote:I brought this up on CS last week and was crucified,I despise the antics of the alphabets as much as the next man but I wanted to see a unification fight as it just might bring us a step closer to an undisputed champ

If they can't make weight then vacate,either poo or get off the pot,as they say on boxrec forum

Most people were on CS saying "who cares about shitty ABC titles,as long as we have good match ups". Well for a start in a title fight we would have 12 rounds,also this may be a good fight but seeing as its a CW,we'll still be nowhere nearer to finding out who the man is at 140
I try not to post threads on CS. Scared of the responses lol
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by crusader »

expe wrote:
handsofstone wrote:I brought this up on CS last week and was crucified,I despise the antics of the alphabets as much as the next man but I wanted to see a unification fight as it just might bring us a step closer to an undisputed champ

If they can't make weight then vacate,either poo or get off the pot,as they say on boxrec forum

Most people were on CS saying "who cares about shitty ABC titles,as long as we have good match ups". Well for a start in a title fight we would have 12 rounds,also this may be a good fight but seeing as its a CW,we'll still be nowhere nearer to finding out who the man is at 140
It's amazing the amount of posters on CS who are well into all this PBC shite, some of them are usually good posters too and it's got them talking complete bollocks.
No doubt. It's like Haymon has a team of posters who do almost nothing but defend his endeavors.
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 23240
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by handsofstone »

I was just having another look at the thread on CS and commented on why McDonnell was stripped by the IBF after about 6 days for not defending yet apart from Jean and Santana,I can't remember Lamont defending the belt any other time,and it was years ago he beat Khan,I may be wrong though

What gets me though is people remarking on why care about the ABC when we have great fights,but despite Peterson being a good fighter ,if it wasn't for his ABC belt then no one would be calling for this fight

Garcia dominated Matthysse who flattened Peterson,

I'll give you a scenario,Garcia widely outpoints Peterson,who remains IBF LWW champ and defends against some schmuck,then the same people on CS who justify this non title catchweight bout will be up in arms as Lamont isn't real champ

And if I'm honest I don't think this fight makes for compelling viewing but the unification angle intrigued me as as ive already posted,I'm all for undisputed/definitive no1's
davie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6763
Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 00:45

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by davie »

I posted over on CS, that if (and that's a feckin huge IF) this PBC could take over boxing the way UFC did MMA, then it could arguably be the fix boxing needs.

Boxing is broken!
The ABC titles are a sham and political wrangling is depriving the sport of the competition it needs to be taken seriously

There will never be an amicable settlement between promtoters, between governing bodies, between rival TV channels.
The problem is only going to get worse and worse as every individual scraps for their share and more people move in muddying the waters further.
So for me, if coming together can never work, it will require one of these greedy, power hungry, unscrupulous bastards to actually succeed in their end goal and get what they want..... over all control!

That doesn't sit well with me, any more than it will with anyone else on these boards, but it's the reality.
The sport needs one master, one governing body, one way of running things.
Now the unfortunate side effect of that is that that one person/organisation will become filthy rich and obviously too powerful.

Many promoters have tried to take over, Goldenboy was on route to taking the lions share of the best fighters across the pond a few years back but that fell apart.
The one thing that, IMHO, would always stand in the way, is any promotional stable continuing to allow the multi-belt system to continue to call the shots. What any UFC style take over needed was it's own title that negated the need for the ABC straps. And that's the key to Haymons PBC plan.

Another key difference, is while Goldenboy and Top rank made big money deals with TV companies like Showtime and HBO and chased the big bucks on PPV shows, PBC has brokered a deal with the free to air stations like CBS and NBC and is going to be beamed into the consciousness of far more fans, bringing more casual fans back into the game.

If this PBC falls on it's arse, then Haymon has just added another meaningless ABC strap to the long list.
But if he can get control of the best fighters, through cornering the market in the US and making pacts and agreements with overseas promoters and this can effectively become bigger than the sport, as UFC did with MMA, the best fighters will all gravitate towards his stable, his belt, his fighters.
In UFC if you want to fight the best, you need to go to the UFC. And lets be honest, in spite of it's other failings, we're all envious of the one belt/one champion set up of the UFC. If he can gather enough control over enough top fighters, then the only way to reach the top is to move to the PBC set up and fight PBC fighter. Then this can work.

Of course it probably can't work, that's where we go back to that big IF.
Too many big name promoters have too much to lose and will fight tooth and nail to hold on to their share.
People will still continue to recognise the WBA/WBC/WBO/IBF/WBU/IBO world title, super title, interim title, silver european international intercontinental title. These guys will still be recognised as world champions by the sport, the media and the fans and the rankings of each governing body, alongside the ring magazine ratings and the now PBC rankings will continue to keep the water so muddy that the Stuey Halls and Paul Smiths of this world can continue to be considered world class.

No it wont work, but it's potentially the only fix boxing can hope for. And I, perhaps naively, wish it all the best.
ClivePatrickLyons
Middleweight
Posts: 2811
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 22:10

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by ClivePatrickLyons »

ASK THE DON :shame: :doh: HAYMON HE WANTS IT ALL FOR HIMSELF
reggaereggae
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4723
Joined: 21 Dec 2009, 17:01

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by reggaereggae »

ILikeBeer wrote:Remember when boxing used to be a sport?
No. I wasn't alive in the 1930s :DDD

It's definitely worse than ever, but I remember soon after I first got into boxing; there was the Lalonde-Ray Leonard 2 weight championship fight at super middle and the week before I believe the WBO were either invented or came to prominence to sanction a super middle fight between Tommy Hearns and James Kinchen so that Hearns could be the first 5 or 6 weight champ before Leonard.

What a fiasco that was.....
Datsue
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Why Is Garcia V Peterson 10 Rounds At Catchweight For No Belts?

Post by Datsue »

reggaereggae wrote:
ILikeBeer wrote:Remember when boxing used to be a sport?
No. I wasn't alive in the 1930s :DDD

It's definitely worse than ever, but I remember soon after I first got into boxing; there was the Lalonde-Ray Leonard 2 weight championship fight at super middle and the week before I believe the WBO were either invented or came to prominence to sanction a super middle fight between Tommy Hearns and James Kinchen so that Hearns could be the first 5 or 6 weight champ before Leonard.

What a fiasco that was.....

Which is entirely my point, reggae mate.

If PBC produces better matchups, then whoopeee, get me on the motherfucking bandwagon. If it's more of the same (or worse) with a Don King/Carl King manager/promoter signing both sides of the deal with the same shite being shovelled into our willing maws, then...
Post Reply