Time To Revisit Plan A, Mikkel Kessler

[JakeNDaBox]

Almost forgot the last part of your post:

P. S. the fact remains that you haven't made a legitimate piece of journalism here, that means seeking information from the parties involved, and you clearly haven't done that. I guess that's all my fault for being Danish? It's time to stop giving Jake Donovan a pass.

It was an editorial. I've already stated as much within this thread, I'm pretty sure in a direct response to one of your posts.

[JakeNDaBox]

I'm really surprised by this article by Jake Donevan, whom I always read with pleasure, not because of content, though that's mostly interesting, but because of the writing quality itself.

I have no problems with you disrespecting my article, but at least spell my name right mutha****a!!!

Just jokes, my friend (though it is Donovan, not Donevan)

This time however, it seems more like a disguised PR statement for Showtime.

Interesting viewpoint, definitely a first. It wasn't really my intention, though I do admit that leaving a scheduled televised date vacant is something I always find disturbing.

Every day, and every hour of every day, 366 days a year, fights are made and unmade for a huge variety of reasons, some even with contracts already signed. The vast majority are a legally accepted part of the wheeling and dealing way that the boxing business unfolds, and the Kessler-Miranda proposed bout is no different.

YES, I'd like to see it too, but if NO contract was signed, and they were still in the discussion stages either side has the perfect liberty of calling a halt, and changing direction.

I agree, in boxing especially it seems that all contracts are made to be broken or, in the event they're not signed, ignore altogether. But what bugged me is Palle going through the whole song and dance of having Miranda agree to all of their demands, yet still walk away sans explanation in the end. It's as if Palle's bluff was called and that he was never terribly interested in the fight to begin with. For that, just say no up front, that you're looking in other directions.

Kessler has a VERY valid reason, which the writer tries to obfuscate by saying that ......"Kessler's team would go on BABBLING(my emphases) about ALPHABET TITLE OPPORTUNITIES.......

It's clear that using the term "babbling' is Jake's way of denigrating a normal everyday boxing matchup process. These "alphabet titles" are the various titlebelts issued by the WORLD recognised Boxing Authorities. If you want to talk about the IBO and the IBA and a few others, (like the BS) as alphabet titles, then be my guest. I agree with you. But I don't consider the WBA, WBO, IBF, and WBC as "alphabet".

This is where I can't and won't agree. Kessler (or Palle) didn't have a valid reason. They were just recently named mandatory challenger - at which point Mundine-Soliman III was already scheduled. Palle wanted a title shot for Kessler the very moment he was named mandatory, in effect trying to kill two fights with one statement.

I agree that the WBA/WBC/IBF/WBO belts carry more weight than all others. But again I ask, who did Mundine beat to earn recognition as a world champion? If he won a vacant belt that's one thing. But he won the lesser version of the title Kessler already held and which Calzaghe currently owns (though will soon be forced to vacate along with his other SMW belts). And where my beef further lies is that Kessler/Palle never once regarded Mundine as a legit world champ until they were recently named mandatory.

As Calzaghe said, Kessler was his toughest and strongest opponent, and was "more like a cruiserweight than a Super-Middle". So it's logical for him having lost his Super-Middle titles, to go to Lt-heavy, and if he can get a title shot right away, and PARTICULARLY against a Champion whom he has already beaten, he'd be worse than a DAMNED FOOL not to run, jump and grab at it with BOTH HANDS.

HE and his management look after HIS affairs which are no one elses business. Why does Jake Donevan try to interfere? Fair comment and speculation are all very well, but this deliberate denigration, seemingly reserved only for Kessler, is strange to me. Kessler is already being called a coward...

Incorrect, I never once called Kessler a coward. If nothing else, I'm disappointed in this fight not happening because I believe he is the best super middleweight in the world. With Calzaghe most likely moving on, a vacancy will be left at the top, one which most (myself included) look to Kessler to fill the void.

Yes, it's logical to look at LHW opportunities. But again, he went through the whole spiel with Miranda acting as if they were going to take the fight. But now, their minds change every time a new opportunity surfaces. Meanwhile, they're still presently left with nothing, which is a lot less than the $600,000 they're leaving on the table for a fight oh so many are claiming to be "an easy night's work."

Of course so was Vitaly Klitschko for retiring against Chris Byrd, and for delaying his fight againt Rahman (whom he'd have eaten alive without salt)
and so many other, decent, brave, guys who risk their lives for our titilation.

You kinda lost me here. Yes, Vitali's a lot braver than the average fan who criticizes him without ever taking a risk themselves. But fighters are compensated for the risks they take - especially someone like Vitali. Any criticism directed at him was (and continues to be) completely justified, save for perhaps the Byrd incident, as most wouldn't even go to work the day after separating a shoulder, never mind fighting someone else for another nine minutes.

As intelligent human beings we have no right to be so ******, but we do it anyway. It's a free country, after all.!!

As to the outcome of the Kessler management decision, we won't know until it happens.

Until what happens? Right now, nothing is happening - other than everyone else fighting. I mean, say he gets a shot at the WBA LHW title - is fighting Yuri Barashian or Hugo Garay (their top two contenders, not sure which one would get bumped to allow Kessler to take their place) going to bring him more money or a greater profile than beating Miranda while awaiting a shot at a SMW title? I'd believe the argument that he stands to make more for a Mundine rematch, but that's not available at the moment.

[JakeNDaBox]

JAKE- Maybe "Snoop Pearson" too, but it's really a plagiarism of of Mae West. In a 1932 movie, in which when the cloakroom girl, admiring her diamond ring, said "GOODNESS, what lovely diamonds", Mae, with her little twitchy swagger, replied.."Goodness had nothin' to do with it"..........

As you probably know, she wrote all her own material, and was already a huge Broadway star for many years before she came to Hollywood. Since this was her first film, however, I'm not certain that these lines were actually written by her.

Fair point (the movie was Night After Night, right?). The quote I mentioned was on The Wire a month ago, which is why it was fresher on my mind. (and admittedly, I watch DVD's and recordings of the Wire far more than I do Mae West movies)

[PunchDrunk]

I don't expect a pass, and you are taking this personal. I never said your opinion doesn't matter - if it didn't, I never would've responded to your posts. All I said was that you're taking this more personal than others. And the fact that each post you make is more insulting than the preceding one is proving that point

But let's start over, I'll address every nook and cranny of your last post as a starting point, since you claim I'm not addressing any issues

And I can guarantee that of all of the names on the list, a grand total of zero had a major American network willing to showcase them on a regular basis. I can name hundreds of fighters whose careers suffered while arguing contracts and the law with Don King. But so long as I can also name a couple who succesfully moved on beyond his clutches, then what does any of that matter?


It's very legitimate. And there are some instances in which you will have far more knowledge than others. I never stated otherwise. If you were waiting for me to say "agreed" or "co-sign", then i'm sorry. I chose to pick the spots that I disagreed with, to avoid offering the message board equivalent of War and Peace. but as I mentioned earlier, the points you made in previous posts is what prompted me to respond. I didn't disagree with your post(s) as a whole, just chose the spots for which I felt offered another side to the argument.


I didn't insinuate anything other than you taking the article more personal than others. But yes, just as most American writers can't help but show bias toward fighters with whom they are more familiar, it's not out of line to suggest you're reading this column with a biased viewpoint, however subtle or glaring it may be. Like I said in my previous post, I don't know most posters here from a hole in the wall. The conclusion I reached was a viewpoint from the outside looking in, not an official FBI profile analysis or anything.


I'm all for constructive criticism, in fact I prefer it to empty back-slaps because you learn far more from the former. The points you critiqued, I offered a response. If there are others I've failed to address, then list them in a reply and I'll answer each and every one, even the ones I already agree with. But now you're saying I'm getting personal when in nearly ever post since my reply, you **** on my work (claiming it to be misinformed and a waste of space that could've been limited to a message board post) and keep making assumptions of how I view your opinion. To once again clarify, I never said your opinion doesn't count. That's YOUR interpretation of what's being said, much like my claim that you read this editorial and walk away with a different feeling than, say someone who's not from Denmark and/or a Kessler fan (since not all Kessler fans are from Denmark, nor are all Danish fight fans necessarily Kessler fans).

Whatever points you believe I've failed to address, list them and I promise to offer a response.

Why did you take the time to find my IP? What significance does my present location have in relation to the arguments I'm making? Why mention it, if not to discredit what I'm saying?
You claim that you were saying the same thing in your editorial as I was saying in my first post. I then have to tell you that your main message is "blame Kessler" since that is your headline. That is when you pull the "you're Danish" card on me. You have not responded on word on what I actually said about your journalism.
What I was proposing was quite simply that you produced some real journalism by getting some information on why "Team Kessler" have acted in this way. Bring something new to the table, something informative. I stand by my claim that all you do is point the blame at Kessler without presenting anything new, which is something anyone on this forum could have done. I could write the exact same piece, claiming Kessler was as innocent as a newborn, using largely the same common knowledge info you used, because, as you said, it's all a matter of perception. If you think that means I'm taking what you're saying personal, so be it.

much like my claim that you read this editorial and walk away with a different feeling than, say someone who's not from Denmark

Exactly, someone less critical about what they read comes away with the conclusion "Kessler is a *****," because that is the essence of what you're saying.

[BMWM3P]

I'll watch Kessler against anyone he is just such a solid fighter. His style is incredible and his punches are just a thing of beuty. Miranda on the other hand fights ugly but his knockouts are second to none. A fight between Miranda and Kessler would be a win-win situation we would get either a masterful boxing performance with a possible knockout or devastating knockout.

[edgarg]

Fair point (the movie was Night After Night, right?). The quote I mentioned was on The Wire a month ago, which is why it was fresher on my mind. (and admittedly, I watch DVD's and recordings of the Wire far more than I do Mae West movies)

Thanks Jake. I couldn't remember the name of the movie, I've seen them all, and still do occasionally on TV. May even have a few copies somewhere. As I was growing up, I admired her, and our female home staff used to practice her swagger, as well as some of her most "pithy" sayings. I got a hell of a shock when I found out she was 42 when she made her first movie.
What I like is her rather nasal bluesy voice, and she always has a damn good backing band.

Nearly all her unknown leading men went on to top stardom. I recall, that in ascene, she was lying back on a sort of small hayrick, just outside her house, and asked Randolph Scott (can you imagine, the later famous-for-Westerns tough guy) "why dontcha come over here and take a relaxitive"?

[JakeNDaBox]

Why did you take the time to find my IP? What significance does my present location have in relation to the arguments I'm making? Why mention it, if not to discredit what I'm saying?

I did so to see where you were coming from, figuratively and literally. My hunch was that you are from Denmark and a Kessler fan, and I was correct. It wasn't to dismiss your argument, just my putting 2 and 2 togegther in wondering why you were taking the debate so personal. I'm not sure how many times I can keep repeating this.

You claim that you were saying the same thing in your editorial as I was saying in my first post. I then have to tell you that your main message is "blame Kessler" since that is your headline. That is when you pull the "you're Danish" card on me. You have not responded on word on what I actually said about your journalism.
What I was proposing was quite simply that you produced some real journalism by getting some information on why "Team Kessler" have acted in this way. Bring something new to the table, something informative. I stand by my claim that all you do is point the blame at Kessler without presenting anything new, which is something anyone on this forum could have done. I could write the exact same piece, claiming Kessler was as innocent as a newborn, using largely the same common knowledge info you used, because, as you said, it's all a matter of perception. If you think that means I'm taking what you're saying personal, so be it.

Once again, you continue to claim that I'm avoiding your questions, when in fact you just don't like my answers. For the third time today, the piece was an EDITORIAL. Without being a **** about it, all I can offer at this point is the textbook definition:
Main Entry: 2editorial
Function: noun
Date: 1830
: a newspaper or magazine article that gives the opinions of the editors or publishers; also : an expression of opinion that resembles such an article

If it were intended as a full-blown feature, yes the tone would've been different. Yes, I would've tried my damnest to get to the heart of the matter.But that said - who do I talk to without it becoming third party sources? Palle doesn't respond to voice messages or e-mails. Kessler himself is impossible to contact. Their American-based contact Mike Marley (with whom I am friendly) can't offer any contact info beyond what I already have, nor will he go out of his way to assist another writer in putting together a story without first running something on his own site.

Instead, I decided to write something on a subject that hasn't been covered by the site much beyond press releases. It was Sunday morning filler, and basically my viewpoint to counter the argument that Team Kessler is justified in backing out of one fight and try to sabotage another for the sake of satisfying their own agenda.

My main reasons for feeling the way I do? Because there's still no fight on May 24, and neither Kessler or Miranda presently have an opponent lined up. The arguments I've heard in Kessler's favor all suggest that he has other opportunities. My article clearly outlines that he doesn't - Mundine is proceeding with the Soliman fight, and the WBA has yet to bump one of its top two rated light heavyweights to make room for Kessler in a future vacant title match.

You say it's common knowledge. If so, then why does the alphabet scenario continue to be the counterpoint to those who justify Kessler's passing on a Miranda fight? I've yet to hear a logical response to my counter that he in fact has nothing lined up for the immediate future and is forced to wait out everyone else's immediate schedule.

Exactly, someone less critical about what they read comes away with the conclusion "Kessler is a *****," because that is the essence of what you're saying.

I can't say I've heard more than five people come to that conclusion - in fact the only ones I've heard say that have posted in this thread, and were immediately shot down by those with a more objective viewpoint. It's the assumption your claiming as my message. Why? Because you're reading too much into what's being written.

What else hasn't been addressed? What else would you like to discuss that won't result in either one of us repeating ourselves? Believe it or not, I'm enjoying the back and forth (at least once the insults are removed from the equation). Honestly, if anything remains unanswered, let me know.

Let me also add the following: If Mundine had nothing lined up, I can understand Team Kessler hotly pursuing the fight. If Kessler had been the mandatory for a year or so, I can understand their accusing Mundine of ducking him.

But neither is the case. Mundine's had the Soliman fight lined up for a minute. And Kessler was just recently named mandatory, all while he was tentatively scheduled - and he/his team verbally agreed - to face Miranda.

[edgarg]

I have no problems with you disrespecting my article, but at least spell my name right mutha****a!!!

Just jokes, my friend (though it is Donovan, not Donevan)


Interesting viewpoint, definitely a first. It wasn't really my intention, though I do admit that leaving a scheduled televised date vacant is something I always find disturbing.


I agree, in boxing especially it seems that all contracts are made to be broken or, in the event they're not signed, ignore altogether. But what bugged me is Palle going through the whole song and dance of having Miranda agree to all of their demands, yet still walk away sans explanation in the end. It's as if Palle's bluff was called and that he was never terribly interested in the fight to begin with. For that, just say no up front, that you're looking in other directions.


This is where I can't and won't agree. Kessler (or Palle) didn't have a valid reason. They were just recently named mandatory challenger - at which point Mundine-Soliman III was already scheduled. Palle wanted a title shot for Kessler the very moment he was named mandatory, in effect trying to kill two fights with one statement.

I agree that the WBA/WBC/IBF/WBO belts carry more weight than all others. But again I ask, who did Mundine beat to earn recognition as a world champion? If he won a vacant belt that's one thing. But he won the lesser version of the title Kessler already held and which Calzaghe currently owns (though will soon be forced to vacate along with his other SMW belts). And where my beef further lies is that Kessler/Palle never once regarded Mundine as a legit world champ until they were recently named mandatory.


Incorrect, I never once called Kessler a coward. If nothing else, I'm disappointed in this fight not happening because I believe he is the best super middleweight in the world. With Calzaghe most likely moving on, a vacancy will be left at the top, one which most (myself included) look to Kessler to fill the void.

Yes, it's logical to look at LHW opportunities. But again, he went through the whole spiel with Miranda acting as if they were going to take the fight. But now, their minds change every time a new opportunity surfaces. Meanwhile, they're still presently left with nothing, which is a lot less than the $600,000 they're leaving on the table for a fight oh so many are claiming to be "an easy night's work."


You kinda lost me here. Yes, Vitali's a lot braver than the average fan who criticizes him without ever taking a risk themselves. But fighters are compensated for the risks they take - especially someone like Vitali. Any criticism directed at him was (and continues to be) completely justified, save for perhaps the Byrd incident, as most wouldn't even go to work the day after separating a shoulder, never mind fighting someone else for another nine minutes.


Until what happens? Right now, nothing is happening - other than everyone else fighting. I mean, say he gets a shot at the WBA LHW title - is fighting Yuri Barashian or Hugo Garay (their top two contenders, not sure which one would get bumped to allow Kessler to take their place) going to bring him more money or a greater profile than beating Miranda while awaiting a shot at a SMW title? I'd believe the argument that he stands to make more for a Mundine rematch, but that's not available at the moment.

I can accept everything you've written as valid and normal, even sometimes accurate- except one thing-. You refer to it as "joke". Internet allows much, and times have certainly changed, but no one has ever called me anything remotely resembling this. Such language is, to me, offensive.

As for "calling Kessler a coward", I didn't say you did, and didn't intend it, although I can now see that you might think so. It was in a letter by another poster, which I read before I commented on your article. I should have made that clear, but it slipped by. Sorry.

[edgarg]

And as to misspelling your name, it was my error, I didn't look at it closely. Where I come from there are many of that name, spelled both ways. I still have a deformed fingernail from the peck of a fighting **** owned by neighbours named Donevan (when I was about 5). There were 4 sons and two daughters and I think I fought with every one of them.

[JakeNDaBox]

I can accept everything you've written as valid and normal, even sometimes accurate- except one thing-. You refer to it as "joke". Internet allows much, and times have certainly changed, but no one has ever called me anything remotely resembling this. Such language is, to me, offensive.

As for "calling Kessler a coward", I didn't say you did, and didn't intend it, although I can now see that you might think so. It was in a letter by another poster, which I read before I commented on your article. I should have made that clear, but it slipped by. Sorry.

And as to misspelling your name, it was my error, I didn't look at it closely. Where I come from there are many of that name, spelled both ways. I still have a deformed fingernail from the peck of a fighting **** owned by neighbours named Donevan (when I was about 5). There were 4 sons and two daughters and I think I fought with every one of them.

Edgar my friend, you are quickly becoming one of my favorite posters.

Point taken on the "coward" clarification. You actually were fairly clear in how you stated it, I just misread it in responding.

Sorry about those feckin' Donevans that tormented your childhood. I know for a fact it's not my clan, though - there's barely enough people in our family to fill a small office (the opposite of my wife's side, who can have Madison Square Garden at S/R/O status if they were to hold a family reunion there)