BoxRec

revpickles wrote: ↑08 May 2019, 00:38 Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?

cs: It works any way they want it to work on any given day.

I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?

cs: Back handers and bribes ??? Whatever are you suggesting ?

I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.

cs: Whatever the theory, the practice is rather different. It largely depends on what suits people like Don King and Al Haymon, maybe Bob Arum and maybe others too.

I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?

cs: See answer above.

If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

cs: Well Joshua isn't the WBC champion so he has no obligation to fight Whyte who for reasons best known to the WBC isn't even their mandatory. Best known to the WBC but it's fairly clear that Al Haymon has blocked it because he doesn't want his champion facing Dillian Whyte because he could lose and that would never do. Haymon and King seem to exert a lot of control over the WBC. I suspect they have compromising photographs of Senor Sulaiman and Ann Other.

cs: The IBF mandatory is Kubrat Pulev. The WBO mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk (recently injured) and the WBA mandatory is, I believe, still to be nominated. Joshua is unlikely to be stripped because he takes his mandatory defences very seriously.

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

cs: He is the number one contender with the WBC but not their mandatory who is currently Dominic Breazeale. Probably when Wilder despatches Breazeale they will nominate Stiverne to fight Molina to establish who will be Deontay's next mandatory defence in 2023. Whyte is not the WBO mandatory and will not become so by beating Rivas.

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

cs: I believe it was Alexandr Ustinov who used to be fairly unimpressive, but who these days is pure dogshit. That's mandatory for the WBA regular belt. Not to be confused with the WBA Super belt held by Joshua, The WBA family size and economy size belts held by nobody you need concern yourself with

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?

cs: IBF bless 'em are always pretty quick off the mark. Joshua was lined up to meet Kubrat Pulev who was their mandatory (and currently is again) but Pulev got injured and pulled out. Joshua duly discharged his oblibation by beating the IBF's replacement, Carlos Takam. He was then intending to defend his WBA belt against mandatory Luis Ortiz, but Ortiz opted to give up his WBA mandatory status in order to fight Deontay Wilder for the WBC belt.

When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)

cs: The WBO's mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk. Neither are likely to replace him unless his torn bicep means he won't be fit to fight Joshua within the time-frame.

If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.

cs: Joshua isn't the obstacle to a fight with Fury. That's probably Bob Arum but like I said, the WBO' s mandatory challenger is currently Oleksandr Usyk.

Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.

cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting.

Pickles

cs: No thanks, just the onions

Thomastearns wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 05:01 Re: Does Mandatory mean anything anymore?


revpickles wrote: ↑ Can somebody explain how mandatory works amongst the different sanctioning bodies in boxing today?

cs: It works any way they want it to work on any given day.

I know what mandatory means but what i don't understand is how fighters can constantly avoid there mandatory obligations without being stripped of the title . Is this where 'back handers and bribes' come into play to corrupt boxing?

cs: Back handers and bribes ??? Whatever are you suggesting ?

I was lead to believe that if a fighter fights another fighter in the top 5 , the winner of that fight automatically gets 'mandatory' to fight for the world title and if the Champion has arranged another fight before the mandatory was put in place then he must defend the belt in the next fight or vacate it.

cs: Whatever the theory, the practice is rather different. It largely depends on what suits people like Don King and Al Haymon, maybe Bob Arum and maybe others too.

I was also lead to believe that if a fighter takes on all comers and works his way threw a division arriving at the number 2 spot he becomes 'second best' and gets Mandatory also?

cs: See answer above.

If i am correct why is Dillian Whyte not Mandatory for Anthony Joshua when he is ranked number 2 by the WBC and the WBO and why has Joshua not been stripped of the titles yet?

cs: Well Joshua isn't the WBC champion so he has no obligation to fight Whyte who for reasons best known to the WBC isn't even their mandatory. Best known to the WBC but it's fairly clear that Al Haymon has blocked it because he doesn't want his champion facing Dillian Whyte because he could lose and that would never do. Haymon and King seem to exert a lot of control over the WBC. I suspect they have compromising photographs of Senor Sulaiman and Ann Other.

cs: The IBF mandatory is Kubrat Pulev. The WBO mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk (recently injured) and the WBA mandatory is, I believe, still to be nominated. Joshua is unlikely to be stripped because he takes his mandatory defences very seriously.

When Whyte fights Rivas (number 4 WBO) will that give Dillian Whyte yet another mandatory if he wins ?

cs: He is the number one contender with the WBC but not their mandatory who is currently Dominic Breazeale. Probably when Wilder despatches Breazeale they will nominate Stiverne to fight Molina to establish who will be Deontay's next mandatory defence in 2023. Whyte is not the WBO mandatory and will not become so by beating Rivas.

Who did Manuel Charr beat to become Number 2 or Mandatory for the WBA title?

cs: I believe it was Alexandr Ustinov who used to be fairly unimpressive, but who these days is pure dogshit. That's mandatory for the WBA regular belt. Not to be confused with the WBA Super belt held by Joshua, The WBA family size and economy size belts held by nobody you need concern yourself with

Why did the IBF strip Tyson Fury after 14 days for not meeting his mandatory obligations yet they let Anthony Joshua 'duck' his mandatory challengers without being stripped or made to vacate ?

cs: IBF bless 'em are always pretty quick off the mark. Joshua was lined up to meet Kubrat Pulev who was their mandatory (and currently is again) but Pulev got injured and pulled out. Joshua duly discharged his oblibation by beating the IBF's replacement, Carlos Takam. He was then intending to defend his WBA belt against mandatory Luis Ortiz, but Ortiz opted to give up his WBA mandatory status in order to fight Deontay Wilder for the WBC belt.

When Tyson Fury (WBO NUMBER 3) beats Tom Schwartz (WBO NUMBER 2) Does this not give the winner a Mandatory shot before the winner of Dillian Whyte V's Rivas because Tyson fights in June but Dillian fights in July? (Tyson beat's Dillian to the post to force Mandatory)

cs: The WBO's mandatory is Oleksandr Usyk. Neither are likely to replace him unless his torn bicep means he won't be fit to fight Joshua within the time-frame.

If Joshua refuses to defend against the winner of Fury v's Schwartz, will the mandatory rules of boxing be re-written once again or is it just broken and really none existent until you upset somebody in charge of the corrupt side of boxing.

cs: Joshua isn't the obstacle to a fight with Fury. That's probably Bob Arum but like I said, the WBO' s mandatory challenger is currently Oleksandr Usyk.

Please someone correct me if i'm wrong, teach me how Mandatory is enforced in boxing today for those who aspire to fight there way to the top rather than buy there way to the top.

cs: You have already worked out the answer: The governing bodies are rotten to the core and make the rules up as they go along. The best of them are the IBF but they are not beyond reproach. The others are frankly disgusting.


This post needs permanently pinning up somewhere to serve as an excellent introduction into the bewildering way that professional boxing is being run today.

revpickles wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 10:34 Thanks for this Thomas , How do i learn what you know ? where is this information you have given me and how can i learn this?

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 05:50 The WBC allowed Deontay Wilder to perform five voluntary defences of his title, during a (near) three-year time period, before facing his first underserving mandatory challenger (Bermane Stiverne).

Wilder will be performing only his second mandatory defence of his WBC championship against another underserving title challenger, Dominic Breazeale, 18 months after engaging in the Stiverne rematch.

Fighters like Andre Ward and Floyd Mayweather Jr. were allowed to retain ownership of some of their titles for several years without having to perform a mandatory defence of their belts.

Therefore, I’m not sure if a fighter possessing “mandatory challenger” status is really all that significant, because champions that generate a lot of money for the various sports’ governing bodies will rarely be stripped of their titles, due to their reluctance to miss out on receiving sizable sanctioning fees.

jujigatame wrote: ↑17 May 2019, 10:49 Mandatories are a good idea that have been rendered completely worthless and counterproductive because no ABC org can be trusted to make reasonable rankings.

jujigatame wrote: ↑17 May 2019, 14:01 Strict enforcement really isn't a good thing if you can't be trusted to name reasonable contenders.