Originally posted by omarinbox
View Post
GBP never denied the story.
Prior to that article being published, the WBA had first announced that Khan had to fight Maidana next or be stripped; then they announced that it had gone to purse bids; then they announced that the purse bids wouldn't be needed because the fighters were about to sign to fight each other. Just after Reeno's article was published, the WBA mysteriously went quiet about the mandatory. Even more mysteriously (if you don't believe the article), they have been silent about the mandatory ever since.
Just prior to Reeno's article being published, Maidana was saying he would enforce his mandatory. Then his management had a meeting with Schaefer of GBP. Then, just after that article was published, Maidana said that his management had told him it was in his best interests to wait a few fights before enforcing his mandatory.
Just prior to Reeno's article being published, Roach said that Maidana was too much of a high risk low reward fight, and that it needed to be built up for several more fights to make the reward commensurate with the risk; and that he would advise Khan to vacate if the mandatory was enforced.
Then you have the fact that a Khan fight would be both the biggest payday available to Maidana, and Maidana's best hope by far of winning a title, given the style match-up - and the fact that Maidana was Khan's mandatory and was not Bradley's mandatory. Taking that into account, it it completely illogical that he didn't enforce his mandatory, unless Rick Reeno's story is at least broadly true - especially as Maidana's management subsequently signed to fight Bradley, which from Maidana's point of view would be both a higher risk fight (given the style match-up) and a lower reward fight than fighting Khan would have been.
Put all that together, and it's clear that the gist of Reeno's article must be true.
Comment