Pac wants to contest Cotto’s title/ Cotto insists that it should be a Non Title!

[mikelovesfood]

If Cotto's bout agreement indicated that it would be a defense of the WBO title, then Cotto vacating the title would indeed be a breach, and he would be open to damages to Top Rank. Typically though bout agreements would absolutely indicate if a title defense was being made, so it leads me to believe it wasnt in the contract, otherwise Cotto would be making statements right now against his own interests if there were to be an ultimate breach later, which his lawyer would certainly have advised him against. But I have not seen the bout agreement, so I have no way to know for sure.
Here is the WBO policy on "non-title fights":

SECTION 15. NONCHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTS or NON-WBO CHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTS
(a) Nothing in these Rules is intended to prohibit a World Champion from engaging in non-WBO Championship fights, even if the non-championship fight is in a weight category different from that in which the Champion is the WBO Title holder. The outcome of any non-title fight shall not affect the recognition of the World Championship by the Organization, provided, however, if a WBO Champions loses a match subject to this Paragraph, the WBO the World Championship Committee may order the WBO Champion to conduct a Mandatory Contest within 120 days of losing the match.

(b) A WBO champions shall not participate in a non-championship fight that is not a WBO Championship without the prior authorization of the WBO World Championship Committee. This authorization shall be subject to such conditions as the WBO World Championship Committee determines. In addition, this authorization will be granted only on the condition that the WBO Champion pay a fee to the WBO that is the equivalent of the amount that he WBO Champion would have paid to the WBO if the nonchampionship fight were conducted as a WBO Championship fight.

(c) A WBO Champion who wins a non-WBO Championship in weight class that is different than the weight class in which he holds his WBO Championship must decide within ten (10) days of the non-WBO Championship which title in which weight class he will retain. No WBO Champion may hold a non-WBO Championship in a weight class that is different from the weight class of his WBO Championship.


The WBO differs from the IBF in a very important way. In the IBF, you only retain the title if your bout was OVER the weight limit of your title. If you fight a non-title fight at or below your weight and lose, the IBF vacates the title. The WBO should correct this rule, because to have a guy keeping a title if he loses a non-title bout at or below the weight limit (unless his opponent was overweight) is just silly...............

nice. K+...screw 10 characters!

[JACK D. RIPPER]

so if pac goes back to lighweight tomorow, then challenges edwin valero, you mean valero must be the one to dictate the stipulations of the fight?

No, but the fight would be at lightweight not a catchweight.

Save the power tripping.

[JAB5239]

If Cotto's bout agreement indicated that it would be a defense of the WBO title, then Cotto vacating the title would indeed be a breach, and he would be open to damages to Top Rank. Typically though bout agreements would absolutely indicate if a title defense was being made, so it leads me to believe it wasnt in the contract, otherwise Cotto would be making statements right now against his own interests if there were to be an ultimate breach later, which his lawyer would certainly have advised him against. But I have not seen the bout agreement, so I have no way to know for sure.
Here is the WBO policy on "non-title fights":

SECTION 15. NONCHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTS or NON-WBO CHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTS
(a) Nothing in these Rules is intended to prohibit a World Champion from engaging in non-WBO Championship fights, even if the non-championship fight is in a weight category different from that in which the Champion is the WBO Title holder. The outcome of any non-title fight shall not affect the recognition of the World Championship by the Organization, provided, however, if a WBO Champions loses a match subject to this Paragraph, the WBO the World Championship Committee may order the WBO Champion to conduct a Mandatory Contest within 120 days of losing the match.

(b) A WBO champions shall not participate in a non-championship fight that is not a WBO Championship without the prior authorization of the WBO World Championship Committee. This authorization shall be subject to such conditions as the WBO World Championship Committee determines. In addition, this authorization will be granted only on the condition that the WBO Champion pay a fee to the WBO that is the equivalent of the amount that he WBO Champion would have paid to the WBO if the nonchampionship fight were conducted as a WBO Championship fight.

(c) A WBO Champion who wins a non-WBO Championship in weight class that is different than the weight class in which he holds his WBO Championship must decide within ten (10) days of the non-WBO Championship which title in which weight class he will retain. No WBO Champion may hold a non-WBO Championship in a weight class that is different from the weight class of his WBO Championship.


The WBO differs from the IBF in a very important way. In the IBF, you only retain the title if your bout was OVER the weight limit of your title. If you fight a non-title fight at or below your weight and lose, the IBF vacates the title. The WBO should correct this rule, because to have a guy keeping a title if he loses a non-title bout at or below the weight limit (unless his opponent was overweight) is just silly...............

Thank you my friend.

[OnePunch]

no, but i wasn't the one who signed it.

i'm pretty sure when cotto signed it he forgot about the 47' issue because he thought of money first. you disagree with me here?

with that said...why won't he put the belt on the line as well?

it will only bring in more revenue to the fight.

if he wanted to uphold the "integrity" ( the real issue of this thread) of the paper belt handed to him by the WBO he would've just said hell no to Arum and forget about the whole catchweight issue. he didn't though did he?

so by the result of their actions so far, it is in best issue for both camps to have the belt on the line.

Well, I am a firm protester of titles being on the line in catch-weight fights, regardless of who is fighting. I was against it in DLH-Hops, and I'm against it now. The welterweight division allows each fighter to weigh in between 140.10 and 147 pounds. Those were the terms under which the belt has been contested. Now you have Pac using economic leverage to "rework" the division from 140.10 to 145 for his own advantage. Of course Cotto accepted, because of the amount of money at stake. But its unethical in my opinion, and should be conducted as a non-title fight.

The issue also goes to where do you draw the line with these types of concessions? What if the following were to occur?

1. Pac demanded he wears 8 oz gloves, and Cotto wears 10's. If Cotto agrees, is this ok?

2. Pac demands that he gets a 30 second count in the event of a knockdown, and Cotto gets 5 seconds. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

3. Pac demands that Cotto cannot exceed 30 punches per round. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

My point is that there are rules in place governing these issues, and it shouldnt be up to Pac (or Cotto) to change them to suit their own needs. You want to fight for a WW title? Then your opponent may weight up to 147. Its that simple.

Had Vic demanded that Agbeko come in at 116 in the contract, would that have been ok?

Had Jones demanded that Ruiz come in at 205, would that have been ok?

Had Larios demanded that Pac come in at 127, would that have been ok?

And had Cotto demanded that Quintana come in at 145, would that have been ok?

I think not............

[JM1]

No, but the fight would be at lightweight not a catchweight.

Save the power tripping.

pac and cotto will fight at 145, in what weight is that?

[baracuda]

Well, I am a firm protester of titles being on the line in catch-weight fights, regardless of who is fighting. I was against it in DLH-Hops, and I'm against it now. The welterweight division allows each fighter to weigh in between 140.10 and 147 pounds. Those were the terms under which the belt has been contested. Now you have Pac using economic leverage to "rework" the division from 140.10 to 145 for his own advantage. Of course Cotto accepted, because of the amount of money at stake. But its unethical in my opinion, and should be conducted as a non-title fight.

The issue also goes to where do you draw the line with these types of concessions? What if the following were to occur?

1. Pac demanded he wears 8 oz gloves, and Cotto wears 10's. If Cotto agrees, is this ok?

2. Pac demands that he gets a 30 second count in the event of a knockdown, and Cotto gets 5 seconds. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

3. Pac demands that Cotto cannot exceed 30 punches per round. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

My point is that there are rules in place governing these issues, and it shouldnt be up to Pac (or Cotto) to change them to suit their own needs. You want to fight for a WW title? Then you opponent may weight up to 147. Its that simple.

Had Vic demanded that Agbeko come in at 116 in the contract, would that have been ok?

Had Jones demanded that Ruiz come in at 205, would that have been ok?

Had Larios demanded that Pac come in at 127, would that have been ok?

did you also protest on pernell vs jcc fight at 145 for the wbc ww belt?.....

[OnePunch]

did you also protest on pernell vs jcc fight at 145 for the wbc ww belt?.....

I wasnt involved in the business side of the sport back in 1993, and honestly wasnt interested enough in that particular fight to even know it was being held at a catchweight at that time. (I was never a big fan of either Pernell or Chavez)

But no title should have been on the line in that fight. Period. It was just another example of someone (chavez) using economic leverage to rework the rules in their favor. What's wrong is wrong, regardless of when it occurred.....

[mikelovesfood]

Well, I am a firm protester of titles being on the line in catch-weight fights, regardless of who is fighting. I was against it in DLH-Hops, and I'm against it now. The welterweight division allows each fighter to weigh in between 140.10 and 147 pounds. Those were the terms under which the belt has been contested. Now you have Pac using economic leverage to "rework" the division from 140.10 to 145 for his own advantage. Of course Cotto accepted, because of the amount of money at stake. But its unethical in my opinion, and should be conducted as a non-title fight.

The issue also goes to where do you draw the line with these types of concessions? What if the following were to occur?

1. Pac demanded he wears 8 oz gloves, and Cotto wears 10's. If Cotto agrees, is this ok?

2. Pac demands that he gets a 30 second count in the event of a knockdown, and Cotto gets 5 seconds. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

3. Pac demands that Cotto cannot exceed 30 punches per round. If Cotto agrees, is it ok?

My point is that there are rules in place governing these issues, and it shouldnt be up to Pac (or Cotto) to change them to suit their own needs. You want to fight for a WW title? Then your opponent may weight up to 147. Its that simple.

Had Vic demanded that Agbeko come in at 116 in the contract, would that have been ok?

Had Jones demanded that Ruiz come in at 205, would that have been ok?

Had Larios demanded that Pac come in at 127, would that have been ok?

cosign. lets just all call this what this really is. as mak stated: a "superfight"

i'm tired of this damn thread. someone give me K++

ultimately i could careless if the belt was on the line. i just want to see the damn fight already.

for the sole purpose of boosting boxing, catchweights are fine just as long as theres no title involved...

cotto losing and still retaining belt will still look very weird though.

[baracuda]

I wasnt involved in the business side of the sport back in 1993, and honestly wasnt interested enough in that particular fight to even know it was being held at a catchweight at that time. (I was never a big fan of either Pernell or Chavez)

But no title should have been on the line in that fight. Period. It was just another example of someone (chavez) using economic leverage to rework the rules in their favor. What's wrong is wrong, regardless of when it occurred.....

well,if its been done in the past why shoul'nt be done now on pac vs cotto fight?....

[OnePunch]

well,if its been done in the past why shoul'nt be done now on pac vs cotto fight?....

lots of things have been done in the past. Bad decisions, bad stoppages, Judah keeping the title after losing, etc. etc

Come on man, you're smarter than that. How about we LEARN from past mistakes and make the effort to not repeat them?