BoxRec

The rematch clause is being used too much. Unless the fight is controversial or draw,
one guy wins and the other gets back in line. Why is there a Povetkin/Whyte rematch ?
Did Helenius get a rematch with Washington or Kownacki with Helenius ?
The first Wilder/Fury rematch was warranted but the second ?
This beating a guy twice thing slows the sport down and it is already too slow. It takes
years to get a major fight together.

I agree. These big-name guys fight like once a year now, and that's doubly frustrating when it's just to rehash business that's already finished.

They've always been there.

Agree completely. As some mentioned, it’d be different if the top guys fought more.

Uh pause the 10.000$ price for the caddilac clause that hunk of junk is only worth 7500.

Pause the 30$ per hour salary clause, you only deserve 20$ for your hour.

Pause the 500$ rent per month clause, I spent the cash on hookers and beer.

Or maybe a deal is a deal and we shouldnt tell others how to negotiate?

I wonder about the price value of the rematch clause at negotiations. I’m sure it’s bargained for, but for how much? I recently raged against this practice so I won’t say much else other than to ponder about the real life dollar value of the clause.

A rematch clause is just a hedge against defeat. Kinda like betting against
yourself. If you know you can't accept defeat, negotiate a rematch clause
and get two shots.
It slows down the boxing and results in some fights never happening.
Should we put any stupid stipulation on a fight ? Next we'll be cutting
hair off like in pro wrestling. Somebody will have to leave town forever. lol

Article here

B-side fighters that are willing to accept rematch clauses tend to receive more opportunities, earn bigger paydays and are incentivised because they know they're guaranteed to receive another mammoth purse if they somehow score an upset (i.e Ruiz Jr. and Povetkin).

People still watched Holyfield-Tyson II, Wilder-Fury II and Joshua-Ruiz II, so they'll definitely tune into Whyte-Povetkin II.

I'm not saying I "love" the concept of immediate rematch clauses, but they bring many positives.

And if anyone "dislikes them, then they can always choose to avoid watching any immediate rematches.

It's a simple as that.

End of thread.

In a perfect world, I would like to see all top fighters fighting each other, so rematches can hinder that from happening.

However, since boxing and perfect world will never cross paths, I don't mind rematches since they almost always represent a significant step up from the crap, money grab match ups that are often put forth.

jas80s wrote: ↑29 Aug 2020, 13:22 In a perfect world, I would like to see all top fighters fighting each other, so rematches can hinder that from happening.

However, since boxing and perfect world will never cross paths, I don't mind rematches since they almost always represent a significant step up from the crap, money grab match ups that are often put forth.

Dude, did you miss where Super Genius declared the thread over?

Resumption of thread.

I just think there shouldn't be an immediate rematch unless there was some
controversy in the first match that needs to be resolved. Otherwise, what's
the point.

Seriously, "end of thread" what a dopey thing.

Lol, I see you've met our boi EO, well known for his popularity

Usually doesn't happen if the first fight wasn't competitive anyway. It's just part of voluntary defenses, I hear where the sentiment is coming from its just nowhere near a top problem in boxing.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑30 Aug 2020, 00:33 Lol, I see you've met our boi EO, well known for his popularity

Lmao, holyfield was quite the solid b side.

snake33 wrote: ↑28 Aug 2020, 17:04 The rematch clause is being used too much. Unless the fight is controversial or draw,
one guy wins and the other gets back in line. Why is there a Povetkin/Whyte rematch ?
Did Helenius get a rematch with Washington or Kownacki with Helenius ?
The first Wilder/Fury rematch was warranted but the second ?
This beating a guy twice thing slows the sport down and it is already too slow. It takes
years to get a major fight together.

Good points.
Try running boxing in your minds eye and tell me how it works out for you.
It's a lot more complicated than you think.
It's easy being a fan and picking on this and that and I understand why many come to those conclusions, but when you get into it you understand why some things are the way they are.
You gotta a better idea then let's hear it I'm all ears.

I think one of the tricky problems that confronts boxing is what appeals to casual fans is often different from what appeals to more "seasoned" fans. So, you can gain interest from one group with a product that might not appeal on a mass level to the other group, so which way to go? And there are other issues as well, to Evander's point.

Evander wrote: ↑30 Aug 2020, 02:12

snake33 wrote: ↑28 Aug 2020, 17:04 The rematch clause is being used too much. Unless the fight is controversial or draw,
one guy wins and the other gets back in line. Why is there a Povetkin/Whyte rematch ?
Did Helenius get a rematch with Washington or Kownacki with Helenius ?
The first Wilder/Fury rematch was warranted but the second ?
This beating a guy twice thing slows the sport down and it is already too slow. It takes
years to get a major fight together.

Good points.
Try running boxing in your minds eye and tell me how it works out for you.
It's a lot more complicated than you think.
It's easy being a fan and picking on this and that and I understand why many come to those conclusions, but when you get into it you understand why some things are the way they are.
You gotta a better idea then let's hear it I'm all ears.

It isn't that simple but how about:
A - Less sanctioning bodies.
B - Sanctioning approval of rematches based on the need to resolve issues in the first fight.
C - Boxing is about money and if a rematch will make tons of dough and be really popular forget A and B.

snake33 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2020, 16:33

Evander wrote: ↑30 Aug 2020, 02:12

snake33 wrote: ↑28 Aug 2020, 17:04 The rematch clause is being used too much. Unless the fight is controversial or draw,
one guy wins and the other gets back in line. Why is there a Povetkin/Whyte rematch ?
Did Helenius get a rematch with Washington or Kownacki with Helenius ?
The first Wilder/Fury rematch was warranted but the second ?
This beating a guy twice thing slows the sport down and it is already too slow. It takes
years to get a major fight together.

Good points.
Try running boxing in your minds eye and tell me how it works out for you.
It's a lot more complicated than you think.
It's easy being a fan and picking on this and that and I understand why many come to those conclusions, but when you get into it you understand why some things are the way they are.
You gotta a better idea then let's hear it I'm all ears.

It isn't that simple but how about:
A - Less sanctioning bodies.
B - Sanctioning approval of rematches based on the need to resolve issues in the first fight.
C - Boxing is about money and if a rematch will make tons of dough and be really popular forget A and B.

I appreciate it but it's come up previously hasn't it.
There's nothing new there

Isn’t it kind of obvious that immediate rematch clauses are ALWAYS stipulated in fight contracts to protect A-side fighters possessing “PPV event headliner” status?

There is a financial cost associated with them (since the B-side will very likely be receiving one of the best purses of their careers)?

We NEVER see immediate rematch clauses in place prior to when two relatively anonymous names compete.

The promoters and the TV networks also require immediate rematch clauses to protect their most prized assets, since they want exclusive coverage of their bouts, rather than their fighters generating revenue for their rivals.

And there aren’t that many big-name money-generating fighters in the sport of boxing, so the issue is nowhere near as severe or prevalent as many believe it to be.

Finally, it’s important to note that Dillian Whyte has already headlined PPV events against the likes of Anthony Joshua, Joseph Parker, Dereck Chisora, Oscar Rivas and Alexander Povetkin.

And the Whyte-Povetkin rematch will almost certainly be another PPV, because there's sufficient interest from UK fans to justify it.

I’d imagine POV got a few quid against Wlad.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑02 Sep 2020, 05:00 I’d imagine POV got a few quid against Wlad.

And there would have been an immediate rematch clause in that fight too, which would have been exercised had Klitschko lost.

Wasn't pov a mandatory that went to a purse bid? No clauses in that scenario.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑02 Sep 2020, 07:34 Wasn't pov a mandatory that went to a purse bid? No clauses in that scenario.

You're probably right. I haven't checked. My mistake I guess.

Klitschko has implemented immediate rematch clauses for other fights (such as when he performed a mandatory defence against Fury).

Wladimir was such a dominant champion that any of his rematch clauses weren't discussed.

Technically speaking though, rematch clauses can be included in purse bids, if a fighter or promoter is willing to reward their rival (i.e. the champion takes a smaller purse split or the challenger receives a bigger purse).

I'm guessing it probably doesn't happen much.

https://theathletic.co.uk/2027445/2020/ ... es-debate/

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑02 Sep 2020, 07:34 Wasn't pov a mandatory that went to a purse bid? No clauses in that scenario.

Is someone saying mandatories can't go to purse bids?