Is it fair that Oscar never has to face mandatories?

[brently1979]

He charges what he wants for ticket and PPV and chooses the venue because he IS the promoter. And when you have a champ that will make you big bucks everytime he fights, why not let him fight when he wants.. hes making you the money. Floyd doesn't have mandatories either.. I think they have earned that and have gotten to that status. Could you imagine Floyd or Oscar going up against some weak ass mandatories.. it would be a slaughter

This is true bro. Mosley fought mandatories after he first beat Oscar and all those fights were boring and over before they started. And his career went down hill because no one knew the guys he was fighting.

[psychopath]

Im sure that Rocky and JMM are both better than any of the mandatory challengers. What are you complaining about? He's actually making interesting fights...

Yeah I know, interesting fights . . . to make more money. He can then throw out all the ****i'n rules out in the window and just decide which one will make more money.

If he can let somebody sit around without defending the belt for one year then how could he strip other champions with their belts for not defending their titles on the prescribe time based on their rules? Do you get the point?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a DLH fan, but we're talking of principles here buddy. It's always good when you're fighter is getting the good end of the deal but what if you're on the other side?