Comments Thread For: Peterson vs. Matthysse at 141-Pound Catch-Weight

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jlcelestine
    Contender
    Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
    • Jul 2012
    • 171
    • 9
    • 2
    • 6,248

    #141
    Originally posted by DoktorSleepless
    I wonder which side requested it.

    If it was Matthysse because he wanted to keep his WBC mandatory spot, then that might be a bad move because it's not clear if Garcia will keep the WBC or WBA.

    If it was Peterson, bitch move.
    How can it not be a b1tch move both ways? Whoever requested this, they pulled a cake move.

    Comment

    • mathed
      molṑn labé
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Feb 2009
      • 54551
      • 2,742
      • 2,984
      • 224,675

      #142
      Originally posted by Kenny Blankenship
      I think the reason GBP is doing this is for Peterson to keep his belt if he loses.

      Peterson holds the IBF strap and if I'm not mistaken Matthysse doesn't hold a belt.

      If Matthysse wins he goes on to fight Garcia without having to drop the IBF strap he just won off Peterson due to the WBC not allowing unifications. If the IBF belt was on the line in the Peterson fight GBP would be forced to have one of their fighters drop a belt (Matthysse) in order to fight for another one (Garcia's WBC).

      If Peterson beats Matthysse things get a little more complicated because isn't the winner of Matthysse-Garia supposed to fight Garcia? They still end up dropping a belt...unless...GBP does the same thing again for Peterson, have him fight Garcia without any belt on the line LOL. I've never seen a sport this crazy.
      This makes the most sense to me....it's all because the WBC doesn't allow for unifications.

      Comment

      • Bushbaby
        Wild Apache
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Dec 2008
        • 23513
        • 727
        • 370
        • 32,078

        #143
        Originally posted by mathed
        This makes the most sense to me....it's all because the WBC doesn't allow for unifications.
        So canelo/Trout isn't a unification bout??

        Comment

        • Skip Bayless
          Undisputed Champion
          • Sep 2012
          • 2091
          • 102
          • 146
          • 19,076

          #144
          belts are trash anyway, they hold no meaning. people need to stop throwing their dummies out of the pram and look at the situation.

          Comment

          • shade darkar
            Undisputed Champion
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Apr 2009
            • 6460
            • 227
            • 337
            • 12,996

            #145
            that is pathetic. isnt there enough divisions already without making up weights?

            Comment

            • Dr Rumack
              I Also Cook
              Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
              • Oct 2012
              • 11870
              • 683
              • 303
              • 22,101

              #146
              Originally posted by sk819
              belts are trash anyway, they hold no meaning. people need to stop throwing their dummies out of the pram and look at the situation.
              Belts obviously mean something to GBP, given the lengths they are going to so that they can hold on to them. GBP have de facto control over 9 of the 12 major titles between 140 and 154, and they're determined not to lose that control to anyone.

              Comment

              • shade darkar
                Undisputed Champion
                Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                • Apr 2009
                • 6460
                • 227
                • 337
                • 12,996

                #147
                Originally posted by Bushbaby
                So canelo/Trout isn't a unification bout??
                it isnt is it? mayweather is the wba champ at 154.

                Comment

                • .:: JSFD26 ::.
                  Brawski
                  Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                  • Mar 2012
                  • 33329
                  • 725
                  • 432
                  • 44,762

                  #148
                  Originally posted by Bushbaby
                  Some stange juju floatin round right now. Khan gets some doctored up welterweight rankings and now deese guys a silly catchweight with no title unification?? Conspiracy theory time for me.
                  Watchu got Dawg? I'm always down for some conspiracy discussion.

                  Gimme your best shot!


                  Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

                  Comment

                  • RlCKY
                    Grade 10
                    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                    • Nov 2009
                    • 5492
                    • 231
                    • 575
                    • 12,611

                    #149
                    Honestly...who gives a flying ****? It is 1 pound less they will need to cut. We've still got a fight.

                    The sanctioning bodies probably didn't want to play along with the tourney idea, so this was the way around it.

                    Forget titles people. They don't mean anything anymore.

                    Comment

                    • Russian Crushin
                      atheist with a gun
                      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                      • Dec 2009
                      • 33788
                      • 1,471
                      • 836
                      • 46,625

                      #150
                      "WBC doesnt allow unifications"

                      Which is why Ward, Garcia and the Trout-Canelo winner will all be unified champs holding the WBC title

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP