Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Baltic Region
Total Points: 1,220,704,138,238,685.75
Originally Posted by HarshaSankar
Dear Sir, November 14th, 2012
Is Haye a pathological liar? The following are some of the facts.
1.After his loss to Wladimir Klitschko in July 2011, he wanted a rematch. WK refused because Vitali Klitschko keenly wants to box Haye. VK wants to KO Haye for personal reasons alone. In reply, Haye expressed a keen interest.
2. In October 2011,Haye, no longer a champion, retires. He claimed money offered by VK was not right and his career is over.
3. In November 2011, he claimed he may come out the retirement to fight a Klitschko.
4. VK, after offering a firm fight proposal to Haye, got tired of Haye's ambiguity. VK replaces Haye with Dereck Chisora in early December 2011. Chisora's performance against one-armed Helenius in December 2011 and his readiness to fight VK on February 2012 impressed VK.
5. During the press conference Haye crashes,after Klitschko defeated Chisora with one-arm, Haye demands that VK fight him on financial terms agreed to in December 2011. Was Haye's statement an outright lie? Why would VK agree to terms with one fighter and yet fight another fighter?
6. Despite that,VK offered a fight to Haye in Moscow on September 8th 2012. There is ample evidence to support this. While Haye did not refuse this offer, he accepts another offer to fight Chisora on July 14th,2012.While he insisted on fighting VK in September,VK naturally withdrew his offer. The two main reasons for this withdrawal were
A. What if Haye lost in July? Then VK's fight with Haye would make no sense.
B. Even if Haye won, what if he sustained injuries and cuts that prevent him from preparing properly for VK in a short 8 week gap? Haye was already infamous in using "little-toe"excuse.Why give Haye an opportunity to cite excuses?
7. Haye cited that VK's team told him that VK would fight the winner of Haye-Chisora?
That is an absolute fabrication. Why would VK do that, considering he had just beaten Chisora handily? If he wanted to fight Chisora again,then there would have been an immediate rematch. VK has always wanted to fight Haye. So why would he jeopardize that by wanting Haye to fight someone else?
8. In September 2012, VK cited Haye, and not Manuel Charr, should have been his opponent at the September's fight press conference.
9. In late September, Haye cited his unwillingness to fight in Ukraine because of racist "death threats". Yet VK's ideal place to fight would be Ukraine considering he is about to become a highly active politician in that country..
10.In mid-October, Haye claimed to have an iron-clad contract with VK, with all terms and conditions defined except date and venue. Since VK is head of a new major party that is now mired in national politics, why would VK give Haye such a contract? No one has corroborated Haye's claim.
Since VK's future is uncertain as he is become a prominent political figure in a nation of 46 million, it is the utmost hope that, if WK does prevail against Wach, that he calls out Haye and then have finally fights the Brit before March 31st, 2013. Step-aside money can be offered to Povetkin for this to happen.
There would finally be closure to this miserable ordeal. Yet Haye refuses to put forth any serious effort to land a match with either Klitschko. A fight with Tyson Fury on December 1st would have guaranteed him a title shot. Yet Haye opt to go to an Australian jungle for a few weeks to participate in a reality show. VK remarks to the effect that how can anyone take Haye seriously when he decides to do this? VK still trains hard despite his heavy political demands.
You did some homework, thanks for the post. Everything said, don't you believe Vitali vs Haye might still happen next year? It's in the interest of both fighters. I think the fight will happen. It's all politics man.