Can You Be Labeled a Duck If...

**AliBombaye** · 06-13-2014, 07:16 AM

It's still possible for it to be a duck because boxer A could have added a crap load of ridiculous demands in the contract that boxer B just couldn't agree with. Things such as PPV %, gate %, drug testing (bearing in mind boxer A would basically be accusing boxer B of cheating which isn't exactly something boxer B would be happy about), what gloves boxer B should wear, ring size, who walks out first and so on. There are endless small details which can put either fighter off especially when both fighters are already used to making multi millions for their fights and neither fighter's ego let's them agree upon all the demands in the contract whether they seem fair to them or not.

**travestyny** · 06-13-2014, 07:28 AM

Originally posted by AliBombaye

It's still possible for it to be a duck because boxer A could have added a crap load of ridiculous demands in the contract that boxer B just couldn't agree with. Things such as PPV %, gate %, drug testing (bearing in mind boxer A would basically be accusing boxer B of cheating which isn't exactly something boxer B would be happy about), what gloves boxer B should wear, ring size, who walks out first and so on. There are endless small details which can put either fighter off especially when both fighters are already used to making multi millions for their fights and neither fighter's ego let's them agree upon all the demands in the contract whether they seem fair to them or not.

I can agree with that. The small details can certainly sway things. The De La Hoya/Mayweather contract comes to mind. Mayweather wasn't really in a position to not accept way back then though.

Just doesn't seem right to label Boxer A a duck if everything seems to be agreed upon, yet Boxer B doesn't agree with blood testing that both boxers would have to adhere to. If he has a problem with the blood testing ,then fine. But I don't see how we can say Boxer A ducked this fighter if he agree to fight him and the only hang up is blood testing that both equally will have to adhere to but it's Boxer B that doesn't agree.

**fighter1234** · 06-13-2014, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by AliBombaye

It's still possible for it to be a duck because boxer A could have added a crap load of ridiculous demands in the contract that boxer B just couldn't agree with. Things such as PPV %, gate %, drug testing (bearing in mind boxer A would basically be accusing boxer B of cheating which isn't exactly something boxer B would be happy about), what gloves boxer B should wear, ring size, who walks out first and so on. There are endless small details which can put either fighter off especially when both fighters are already used to making multi millions for their fights and neither fighter's ego let's them agree upon all the demands in the contract whether they seem fair to them or not.

Source on ridiculous PPV % and gate % demands? IIRC the initial 50/50 split was for everything including ppv and gate revenue. And all the things you mentioned after were already agreed on by both boxers (gloves, ring size, who would be announced first etc.) So your only valid point is about the random drug testing that both boxers would undergo. If that was "so ridiculous" what do you call the other boxer's demand that a $10 million penalty would apply for every pound over the welterweight limit?

**shadow-boxer** · 06-13-2014, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by fighter1234

Source on ridiculous PPV % and gate % demands? IIRC the initial 50/50 split was for everything including ppv and gate revenue. And all the things you mentioned after were already agreed on by both boxers (gloves, ring size, who would be announced first etc.) So your only valid point is about the random drug testing that both boxers would undergo. If that was "so ridiculous" what do you call the other boxer's demand that a $10 million penalty would apply for every pound over the welterweight limit?

Wait till jr gong, godfr33, sweethooks and their ilk post their replies. Your facts will be buried bu their lies. And regarding the drug testing, this was brought up even before the nego started. In fact, Roach was quoted as saying that they have no problem with any kind of blood testing. Unfortunately, the nego turned out to be a charade on their part as even Pac admitted in an interview that he backed out because taking of blood from him, even in small quantity, makes him weak. I was a big fan of Pac but this interview made me question his honesty and somewhat validated my su****ion that he is a roider. Not these so called PEDs but the lowly meth (or *******). This I think is the source of his stamina.

**White_Knight** · 06-13-2014, 09:34 AM

Yes, because Pacquiao eventually agreed to all these terms and even taking a lesser share of the revenue but Floyd refused to fight him.

Besides, when it comes to Floyd a signed contract or any other agreements don't indicate he has any intention of going through with the fight. Floyd pulled out of a fight with Winky Wright at the last moment. Funnily enough, he used the same money roadblock as he used with Manny:

"As of right now, it's no deal - they changed the money on me at the last second," said promoter Gary Shaw, who said he was close to finalizing the fight when he walked into Top Rank and Bob Arum's office Thursday.

But within seconds, he said, the deal evaporated.

"I walked in, I told him: "I believe we have a deal,' " Shaw said. "And Bob said, "so it's a deal - 55-45 (money split)'.

"I said, "Bob, that was never, ever discussed, no deal' and that was that."

The day before, Shaw said he and Arum had agreed to a 50-50 purse split as well as other requests from Mayweather's camp. He added that Wright adviser Jim Wilkes and Don King, who has an option on Wright's next fight, agreed as well.

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/22/Sports/Wright_Mayweather_bou.shtml

**Evol** · 06-13-2014, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by fighter1234

Source on ridiculous PPV % and gate % demands? IIRC the initial 50/50 split was for everything including ppv and gate revenue. And all the things you mentioned after were already agreed on by both boxers (gloves, ring size, who would be announced first etc.) So your only valid point is about the random drug testing that both boxers would undergo. If that was "so ridiculous" what do you call the other boxer's demand that a $10 million penalty would apply for every pound over the welterweight limit?

nice sig.. u just proved that floyd is bigger than manny.

**roxy** · 06-13-2014, 10:14 AM

According to people here, everybody in boxing they didn't fight, they ducked.

**smoothsmg** · 06-13-2014, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by roxy

According to people here, everybody in boxing they didn't fight, they ducked.

Exactly. Word is used too much and too loosely. The word should not be used at all honestly.

**12TRIBEsRiSe** · 06-13-2014, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by travestyny

...you actually sign a contract to face the boxer you are accused of ducking?

Let's say Boxer A signs a contract agreeing to a match with Boxer B. For spits and giggles, let's also say that the financial terms are set for 50/50. The contract is sent to Boxer B and Boxer B never signs it. Is it proper to call Boxer A a ducker if he signed on the dotted line? This seems a bit backwards to me.

Sorry to take us way back, and I know (most of us) are all sick of this topic, but the amount of times I see some of you claim this particular boxer dodged the other is overwhelming, when it seems that if anything, it should be the other way around.

Again, how can you be accused of ducking someone when you signed the contract to fight, and the most important stipulation (the money) is set for 50/50?????

the word duck gets thrown around here like dollars at a strip club, example, cotto fought martinez on the 7th and on the 8th people were saying floyd was ducking a rematch

but to answer your question it makes no sense to call fighter A a duck he was clearly ready to take the fight

Can You Be Labeled a Duck If...