Klitschko vs. Haye is Getting Closer as Deadline Looms

[sammylove]

Hasim Rahman was chosen in late October as a replacement for Wlad's mandatory Povetkin. He was chosen because 1) he was recommended by the IBF as their highest-rated available opponent and 2) he was acceptable to HBO, as a well-known fighter.

And Tony Thompson was Wlad's WBO mandatory. He had never been knocked down in his pro career, and had not lost a fight in about 8 years.

Both Arreola and Povetkin have accomplished more at heavyweight than David Haye.

So?
God this is boring.
None of thse fights were memorable and there was no significant build-up or anticipation for them.
Fights should not be made just to please Klitschkos' small army of fans, what we need is fights that have universal appeal.
And this is not a matter of race.

[The Hammer]

So?
God this is boring.
None of thse fights were memorable and there was no significant build-up or anticipation for them.
Fight's should not be made just to please Klitschkos small army of fans, what we need is fights that have universal appeal.
And this is not a matter of race.

The fights were made to please sanctioning organizations and HBO, not to please the fans.

As a Klitschko fan, I most want to see Valuev vs. either brother, but I know it's not going to happen.

[Ravens Fan]

Michael Spinks moved up to Heavyweight and fought Larry Holmes for the lineal title in his first fight at the weight.

Bob Foster did the same vs. Joe Frazier.

Manny Pacquiao is challenging Hatton for his lineal Jnr Welterweight title in his first fight at the weight.

Hopkins plans to fight for Adamak's lineal Cruiserweight title in his first fight at the weight.

There are literally hundreds of other other examples of a dominant champion moving up in weight and fighting for a title in his first fight. Haye is the only one who has ever been called "undeserving".

Call me old fashioned but I believe that fighters should earn their way into a title fight regardless who they are. So, In my opinion none of the fighters you mentioned deserved a shot in a division in which they did not compete. It reminds me of back when Sugar Ray, a one time personnel favorite of mine, was bouncing in out of retirement fighting in title fights when it pleased him. Just one example is when he won not one but two belts in divisions he had never fought in before his fight with Lalonde. And I still scratch my head on just how a Super Middle weight belt was on the line in that fight. If I remember correctly neither one of fighters had ever fought in the Super Middle weight division and yet they fought for the championship. What a pile of BS that was and it just goes to show that no one from the promoters to the fighters cares who deserves a chance at a title because it is simply all about money.

With that said there very well may be a double standard when comparing Haye to the fighters you mentioned. However, there also may be a very simple and obvious reason why many fans view Haye as undeserving. Not that I necessarily agree with it, but at least, unlike Haye, the fighters you mentioned were all dominate fighters in their perspective weight class at some point during their career. So, the question becomes just how dominating was Haye's reign at Cruiserweight? In case you have forgotten, or chose to ignore it, Haye's reign at Cruiserweight lasted a total of, give or take a hand full of seconds, five minutes and two seconds. Hardly a dominating reign by any stretch of the imagination. So, it seems to me that Haye will fight for what use to be considered one of the most prized possessions in all of sports in big part because he can talk **** with the best of them. My only question is does anyone really have to wonder why boxing is slowly dying on the vine?

[Dave Rado]

Call me old fashioned but I believe that fighters should earn their way into a title fight regardless who they are. So, In my opinion none of the fighters you mentioned deserved a shot in a division in which they did not compete. It reminds me of back when Sugar Ray, a one time personnel favorite of mine, was bouncing in out of retirement fighting in title fights when it pleased him. Just one example is when he won not one but two belts in divisions he had never fought in before his fight with Lalonde. And I still scratch my head on just how a Super Middle weight belt was on the line in that fight. If I remember correctly neither one of fighters had ever fought in the Super Middle weight division and yet they fought for the championship. What a pile of BS that was and it just goes to show that no one from the promoters to the fighters cares who deserves a chance at a title because it is simply all about money.

With that said there very well may be a double standard when comparing Haye to the fighters you mentioned. However, there also may be a very simple and obvious reason why many fans view Haye as undeserving. Not that I necessarily agree with it, but at least, unlike Haye, the fighters you mentioned were all dominate fighters in their perspective weight class at some point during their career. So, the question becomes just how dominating was Haye's reign at Cruiserweight? In case you have forgotten, or chose to ignore it, Haye's reign at Cruiserweight lasted a total of, give or take a hand full of seconds, five minutes and two seconds. Hardly a dominating reign by any stretch of the imagination. So, it seems to me that Haye will fight for what use to be considered one of the most prized possessions in all of sports in big part because he can talk **** with the best of them. My only question is does anyone really have to wonder why boxing is slowly dying on the vine?

That's a more thoughtful and objective response by far than any of the others I've seen. A few points.

Haye didn't hold the Ring belt for long but he won it against the lineal champion on the champion's territory, and then immediately defended it against the man the Ring ranked at that time as the top contender (okay Maccarinelli was over-rated, but the fact remains that he was ranked #1). So you're wrong to say he held the title for a few minutes - he held it for several months and had one legitimate defence. And fighters like Cunningham and Adamek were not so highly rated at that time, so it's not legitimate to criticise him for fighting Maccarinelli rather than one of them. The point is that Haye was the universally recognised world champion at Cruiserweight at the time he moved up. And he moved up when he did because he could no longer make the weight easily.

I made the point that it is normal for lineal champs to get an immediate title fight when they move up because several people have said in this thread that Haye's record at Cruiserweight has nothing to do with whether he deserves a title fight at Heavyweight, and I was simply pointing out that those people are completely ignoring boxing history.

Incidentally, the original Sugar Ray (Robinson) also moved up in weight and fought for a title (Light Heavyweight, against Joey Maxim) in his first fight at that weight. The tradition goes back a long way. Henry Armstrong is an even earlier example. So there's nothing "old fashioned" about your argument, it's a very long standing tradition that you are opposing.

And far from the Haye-Wlad match being bad for boxing's popularity, given that it's the first Heavyweight title fight for many years that any neutral boxing fans have been excited about, I would argue that it's very good for boxing. It's not simply because of his mouth that neutrals are excited about it - it's also because of his exceptional speed for a heavyweight, his power, and the fact he always comes to fight. People are sick of seeing fighters like Peter and Ibragimov stand around waiting to be picked off. They want to see fireworks and believe Haye-Wlad would provide them.

Your argument taken to its logical conclusion would mean that Hatton-Pacquiao is bad for the popularity of boxing, whereas there are few fights in recent years that have got so many uncommitted people interested in the sport.

One other point. Some people are talking up Juan Carlos Gomez's legitimacy as a title contender in this thread, but his Cruiserweight reign happened a long time ago (he moved up in 2002); and who has he beaten at Heavyweight? This is a guy who who has never fought any ranked Heavyweights; and who was knocked out in one round by Yanqui Diaz, a fighter who isn't even good enough to be called a journeyman.

[Spray_resistant]

This is such a ****ing tease, look whether Haye deserves a title fight or not is irrelevant to me. I just want to see the fight, and if Haye wants the fight he has to make most of the concessions, because this fight is the best option for him as it would be in the case of any heavyweight for that matter. I mean he does this or........ what? Beats up on Hasim Rahman or an ancient Holyfield? He should just take whatever they are offering and if he wins he will hold all of the cards and actually have something to negotiate with in future fights.

[The Hammer]

The lastest word from Wlad's assistant trainer, who's a regular poster at ESB called "CHEF", is that the contract has been waiting for Haye to sign for a week now.

Haye has agreed to the two options, to the money, to fight in Germany.

But he wants an option on one fight of of Wlads, and Wlad being the champion finds that highly unusual and would not agree, so it's not in the contract waiting to be signed. It is the voluntary defense boxer who normally has to give options not the champion.

So it's Haye's pride that's holding up the contract being signed.

[BetterCallSaul]

Hasim Rahman was chosen in late October as a replacement for Wlad's mandatory Povetkin. He was chosen because 1) he was recommended by the IBF as their highest-rated available opponent and 2) he was acceptable to HBO, as a well-known fighter.

And Tony Thompson was Wlad's WBO mandatory. He had never been knocked down in his pro career, and had not lost a fight in about 8 years.

Both Arreola and Povetkin have accomplished more at heavyweight than David Haye.

Accomplished more at HW? Yes.

Accomplished more in boxing? No.

To be honest most of the HW divisions boxers are fat embarrasing slobs. I only want to see Haye vs one of the Klitschko brothers, or Arreola.

Anybody who wants to see Haye work his way through HW bums to get a title shot need their head checking, or stop watching boxing and tune in to mma.

[Ravens Fan]

That's a more thoughtful and objective response by far than any of the others I've seen. A few points.

Haye didn't hold the Ring belt for long but he won it against the lineal champion on the champion's territory, and then immediately defended it against the man the Ring ranked at that time as the top contender (okay Maccarinelli was over-rated, but the fact remains that he was ranked #1). So you're wrong to say he held the title for a few minutes - he held it for several months and had one legitimate defence. And fighters like Cunningham and Adamek were not so highly rated at that time, so it's not legitimate to criticise him for fighting Maccarinelli rather than one of them. The point is that Haye was the universally recognised world champion at Cruiserweight at the time he moved up. And he moved up when he did because he could no longer make the weight easily.

I made the point that it is normal for lineal champs to get an immediate title fight when they move up because several people have said in this thread that Haye's record at Cruiserweight has nothing to do with whether he deserves a title fight at Heavyweight, and I was simply pointing out that those people are completely ignoring boxing history.

Incidentally, the original Sugar Ray (Robinson) also moved up in weight and fought for a title (Light Heavyweight, against Joey Maxim) in his first fight at that weight. The tradition goes back a long way. Henry Armstrong is an even earlier example. So there's nothing "old fashioned" about your argument, it's a very long standing tradition that you are opposing.

And far from the Haye-Wlad match being bad for boxing's popularity, given that it's the first Heavyweight title fight for many years that any neutral boxing fans have been excited about, I would argue that it's very good for boxing. It's not simply because of his mouth that neutrals are excited about it - it's also because of his exceptional speed for a heavyweight, his power, and the fact he always comes to fight. People are sick of seeing fighters like Peter and Ibragimov stand around waiting to be picked off. They want to see fireworks and believe Haye-Wlad would provide them.

Your argument taken to its logical conclusion would mean that Hatton-Pacquiao is bad for the popularity of boxing, whereas there are few fights in recent years that have got so many uncommitted people interested in the sport.

One other point. Some people are talking up Juan Carlos Gomez's legitimacy as a title contender in this thread, but his Cruiserweight reign happened a long time ago (he moved up in 2002); and who has he beaten at Heavyweight? This is a guy who who has never fought any ranked Heavyweights; and who was knocked out in one round by Yanqui Diaz, a fighter who isn't even good enough to be called a journeyman.

Your points are well taken and I want to make it clear I still get excited when fighters move up and I am still very interested and will watch the fights. However, in my opinion it still does not make it right. And if that is the way business is to be done why not do away with the rating system all together. Just pick the best fight for the most money and have at it. I have to ask what do you think would happen if they tried that in other sports.

I am a big baseball fan and believe what is best for the sport is that every October the Yankees should play the Red Sox for the American League title and to hell with the rest of the league. After all everyone knows the Yanks are the most popular baseball team and they play exciting baseball and therefore will get the best TV ratings. After all no one wants to watch the Florida Marlins play the Texas Rangers in the World Series regardless how well they play. I have an even better idea and why not take it a step further and say to hell with the National League all together. That way we could just have the Red Sox play the Yanks every year in the World Series. Could you imagine how exciting that would be and what huge cash cow it would become? I know this analogy sounds absolutely ridiculous but boxing sometimes sounds just as ridiculous to me.

You also mentioned the Pacman, and yes you are right I don't believe he should be fighting Hatton because he beat up an old over rated washed up fighter in del la Hoya. If you don't believe me just look at his record. Oscar is two fights above five hundred in his last fourteen fights since 1999. And Oscar's record should be at an even five hundred considering he got a gift in his fight against Sturm. Not to get to far of track but I believe that Oscar's has by far had one of the most over rated and over hyped careers I have ever witnessed in the sport regardless of how many titles he has won. Henry Armstrong must roll in his grave when the BS example of Oscar's record is compared with his. Again I want to make myself clear. I am not stating that the Pacman cannot beat Hatton. I just wonder about the other Junior Welters that are rated in the top ten who may never get a shot at the title because fighters will continue to take the big money fights regardless of who really deserves to fight for the title.

In closing I like to say that is why I have so much respect, excluding his last fight, for Holyfield's career. The man was a great Cruiser champ and moved up in weight and fought six Heavyweights including two former champs in Dokes and Thomas before he challenged Douglas. In other words he did not get the title shot because he could talk his way into it, he did it the old fashioned way he earned it.

[Derranged]

I forgot all about this fight..

WAR WLADIMIR!!!!

[Dave Rado]

Your points are well taken and I want to make it clear I still get excited when fighters move up and I am still very interested and will watch the fights. However, in my opinion it still does not make it right. And if that is the way business is to be done why not do away with the rating system all together. Just pick the best fight for the most money and have at it. I have to ask what do you think would happen if they tried that in other sports.

I am a big baseball fan and believe what is best for the sport is that every October the Yankees should play the Red Sox for the American League title and to hell with the rest of the league. After all everyone knows the Yanks are the most popular baseball team and they play exciting baseball and therefore will get the best TV ratings. After all no one wants to watch the Florida Marlins play the Texas Rangers in the World Series regardless how well they play. I have an even better idea and why not take it a step further and say to hell with the National League all together. That way we could just have the Red Sox play the Yanks every year in the World Series. Could you imagine how exciting that would be and what huge cash cow it would become? I know this analogy sounds absolutely ridiculous but boxing sometimes sounds just as ridiculous to me.

You also mentioned the Pacman, and yes you are right I don't believe he should be fighting Hatton because he beat up an old over rated washed up fighter in del la Hoya. If you don't believe me just look at his record. Oscar is two fights above five hundred in his last fourteen fights since 1999. And Oscar's record should be at an even five hundred considering he got a gift in his fight against Sturm. Not to get to far of track but I believe that Oscar's has by far had one of the most over rated and over hyped careers I have ever witnessed in the sport regardless of how many titles he has won. Henry Armstrong must roll in his grave when the BS example of Oscar's record is compared with his. Again I want to make myself clear. I am not stating that the Pacman cannot beat Hatton. I just wonder about the other Junior Welters that are rated in the top ten who may never get a shot at the title because fighters will continue to take the big money fights regardless of who really deserves to fight for the title.

In closing I like to say that is why I have so much respect, excluding his last fight, for Holyfield's career. The man was a great Cruiser champ and moved up in weight and fights six Heavyweights including two former champs in Dokes and Thomas before he challenged Douglas. In other words he did not get the title shot because he could talk his way into it, he did it the old fashioned way he earned it.

If the lineal champs were not fighting any of the top contenders in their own divisions but were only ever fighting big names from other divisions, your analogy would be apt. But as long as the Wlad-Haye winner fights a top Heavyweight contender soon afterwards (taking into account the rematch options) then I don't see the problem. As I say, the tradition of a lineal champ moving up in weight and getting an immediate title shot goes right back to Henry Armstrong and beyond (and I'm not pretending that Haye is another Armstrong, I'm talking about the principle of the thing).

And don't forget that Hatton beat the #1 rated contender in his division in his last fight (you may think Malignaggi was over-rated but that's not the point); and Wlad was scheduled to face Povetkin, a top Heavyweight contender, in his last fight, but Povetkin pulled out.

So I agree that if this were to prevent legitimate contenders from ever getting a title shot, that would be a serious problem, but I don't see any evidence that that's happening in those two cases.

What's far more of a problem is when you have several title holders in one division who don't want to fight each other. Valuev ducking the Klitschkos, for example.