Comments Thread For: Canelo: Golovkin, Nothing He Cares About More Than Money

[j.razor]

haha ah come on lad, these facts that i am talking about are failed drugs tests and clear favouritism from judges throughout his career which i wont start ranting about the dark world of boxing and how these things come to be. canelo is an amazing fighter yes but everything else about him leaves a lot to be desired. GGG the perfect fighter? what in the world are u talking about hes not even close to being the perfect fighter but hes good at what he does and is a clearly more likeable person than canelo. im not a major fan of either i just despise cheaters in competitive sports. Opinions are opinion but facts are facts and all the facts show canelo and his team cheating and manipulating there was all the way through this drama show

Lie & twist it but the FACT is Nelo BEAT lil g & lil g was at the end of the "favouritism" getting that draw. The one time Nelo got a card givin' to him was when he fought Floyd.

[Mirus]

1. You don't know if Nelo would of fought bily hoe & you know bily hoe would of took that Nelo money, after all bily hoe wouldn't fight Jacobs unless he got 5 million.

2. 60/40 was MORE than fair.

3. lil g can be angry all he wants but needs to stop acting like cry baby

4. Amir khan asked for it....

5. 70/30 was fair & props to lil g for taking it.

6. Nelo DID beat lil g & for the rematch not happening on its original date it would of been fair to give lil g more money but not half!

Your statements are very funny :lol: Amir Khan asked for it, LMAO!!!

60/40 is fair for canelo team and you, but not for everybody.

But, sometimes I think ggg really cared more about money. He could fight Charlo, Saunders, Derevyanchenko, Andrade up to now instead of two clenelo fights. He chose more easy money.I can't blame him for it. He has a family. He can care about financial life of his family. In vain he said "I am a boxer, not a businessman". It was very ******. As a ggg fan I admit about it. Very annoying. I have said several times that ggg is a beggar/slave of canelo.

[j.razor]

Yeah, whatever chief. They could be on their third fight, instead of their second if not for Clenelo. And I suppose that Alvarez is getting nothing for fighting Golovkin, one of the most avoided boxers out there, with the highest KO ratio in the MW division? Alvarez can't make more money against any other boxer out there right now. Stop acting like this is a charity case.

3rd fight?!?! Don't nobody wan see that shet! Nelo gon beat him again & lil g is NOT the most avoided boxer out there cuz he have PLENTY of fighters calling him out but lil g too shook cuz he KNOWS his money stops when he faces those calling him out like Jermall. Nelo can make more out there being that he's young & we have a good division with some good fighters that CAN BE promoted the right way instead of ignoring them & keeping them on the shelf or on the down low.

[Citizen Koba]

Ok. I wanted to drop this here for you. I normally don't do this...but I'm making special dispensation this time because you're special. Rule 3.8 is where they get to do whatever they want and create any provisions or conditions for the bout that they want. Given that Charlo remains the WBC mandatory, one can only make the educated assumption that the rematch was ordered under the latter 2 provisions in bold below.

3.11 Immediate Rematch Policy. The WBC does not recognize immediate rematch clauses in bout agreements and will not sanction or authorize immediate rematches, unless it determines in its sole discretion, with the authorization of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, that:

(a) the conduct or result of the bout was controversial or irregular;

(b) there is sufficient public demand; or

(c) a direct rematch would otherwise be in the best interests of the division or boxing.

If the WBC determines that an immediate rematch is appropriate pursuant to this preceding rule, it may order the rematch as a mandatory bout, permit a requested rematch as a voluntary bout, or sanction the bout as a special bout under Rule 3.8.

If the WBC orders such a rematch, it may also rule the winner of the immediate rematch comply with mandatory defense obligations existing at the time of the original contest, or may grant the winner one or more optional defenses prior to fulfilling any mandatory obligations.

Indeed. And what they actually chose to do was described below item C

it may order the rematch as a mandatory bout

.

Thanks for digging that out for me. Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? The fight is a mandatory because that's what 'to order' means - it's virtually synonymous with the verb 'to mandate'.

[Ake-Dawg]

Indeed. And what they actually chose to do was described below item C .

Thanks for digging that out for me. Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? The fight is a mandatory because that's what 'to order' means - it's virtually synonymous with the verb 'to mandate'.

It's a special bout under 3.8. Charlo was elevated to interim champion. Alvarez was pushed to #1 contender just this year. If the fight fell apart, Golovkin would have to fight Charlo to keep the belt. I'm not gonna play dictionary with you. Just read below.

"This is the first step, and now it is up to both sides to make the rematch happen. We've definitely had a*plan that we worked out,*to have the flexibility to make the decisions that are appropriate for the sport and the boxers. We are going to address*the issue [of Jermall Charlo]*on Wednesday*during the session*for mandatory fights - but Charlo is the official challenger and his case will be taken care of.. we will design a path for justice,"*Sulaiman said.

They ordered the fight meaning they made special dispensation for it to happen before Charlo got his shot. It wasn't mandatory as you say. Both fighters could have walked away with no consequences from the WBC. Recall, Alvarez wasn't even ranked after he dropped the belt. He also was not fighting for the WBC belt last year. The "order" came before he agreed to fight for the belt in the second fight.

[robbyheartbaby]

Never said I disagree with the decision. We have to call it what it is. We also have to acknowledge that the decision contradicts his past rants about not being a businessman and being all about the belts.

Fair enough but that's completely forgivable when you are talking about making $20,000,000 as opposed to $1,000,000. That's not contradicting yourself it's just common sense.

[Citizen Koba]

It's a special bout under 3.8. Charlo was elevated to interim champion. Alvarez was pushed to #1 contender just this year. If the fight fell apart, Golovkin would have to fight Charlo to keep the belt. I'm not gonna play dictionary with you. Just read below.

"This is the first step, and now it is up to both sides to make the rematch happen. We've definitely had a*plan that we worked out,*to have the flexibility to make the decisions that are appropriate for the sport and the boxers. We are going to address*the issue [of Jermall Charlo]*on Wednesday*during the session*for mandatory fights - but Charlo is the official challenger and his case will be taken care of.. we will design a path for justice,"*Sulaiman said.

They ordered the fight meaning they made special dispensation for it to happen before Charlo got his shot. It wasn't mandatory as you say. Both fighters could have walked away with no consequences from the WBC. Recall, Alvarez wasn't even ranked after he dropped the belt. He also was not fighting for the WBC belt last year. The "order" came before he agreed to fight for the belt in the second fight.

So you actually quote me the rule where it says the WBC can order the bout as a mandatory - which is what they did, and then try to tell me that it isn't a mandatory? I really don't know where to go from here. If they order a bout then it is a mandatory, special dispensation or not. A bout that has been ordered is exactly what a mandatory is, regardless of whether it follows the usual channels or not.

What you're arguing is that the bout was a voluntary defense in spite of being ordered (or mandated if you prefer).

Anyways. You can go on thinking what you like, man. If you want to believe that this is a voluntary defense I really don't care. I started off just by trying to correct you on a minor technical detail, and I have wasted as much of my time on this as I care to. Whether you choose to believe the information I've presented is, of course, entirely down to you.

Maybe these will be of use, though:

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/_...ory-situations

Middleweight: Gennady Golovkin has been mandated to fight a rematch of his September draw against Canelo Alvarez and negotiations are taking place. The fight is likely to happen May 5. With the rematch nearly finalized, the WBC ordered mandatory challenger Jermall Charlo to face Hugo Centeno for the vacant interim belt.

or this from Mauricio himself?

”Champion Gennady Golovkin (Kazakhstan) has been mandated to fight a rematch with Canelo Alvarez, and negotiations are taking place,” said WBC president Mauricio Sulaiman. ”In order to allow this rematch, the WBC ordered mandatory challenger Jermall Charlo to fight Hugo Centeno for the WBC middleweight interim championship.”

https://www.************.com/2018/01...vkin-2-winner/

boxing news 24

[Ake-Dawg]

So you actually quote me the rule where it says the WBC can order the bout as a mandatory - which is what they did, and then try to tell me that it isn't a mandatory? I really don't know where to go from here. If they order a bout then it is a mandatory, special dispensation or not. A bout that has been ordered is exactly what a mandatory is, regardless of whether it follows the usual channels or not.

What you're arguing is that the bout was a voluntary defense in spite of being ordered (or mandated if you prefer).

Anyways. You can go on thinking what you like, man. If you want to believe that this is a voluntary defense I really don't care. I started off just by trying to correct you on a minor technical detail, and I have wasted as much of my time on this as I care to. Whether you choose to believe the information I've presented is, of course, entirely down to you.

Maybe this will be of use, though:

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/_...ory-situations

Maybe you and Dan Raphael got it wrong because that's not how Suliamon phrased it. The WBC can't mandate a fighter who isn't paying sanctioning fees or listed in their rankings to fight their champion. There is a reason why I made sure you were aware that Alvarez refused to fight for the WBC belt and was only recently reinstated into their rankings.

It's cool. Here is another tidbit for you. If the fight was mandatory...why did K2 set up a deal to fight Saunders if GBP didnt meet their financial demands. The deal was in place and confirmed by Warren and Saunders. Wouldn't that have meant GGG would have been stripped again if it was mandatory as you say.

[Citizen Koba]

Maybe you and Dan Raphael got it wrong because that's not how Suliamon phrased it. The WBC can't mandate a fighter who isn't paying sanctioning fees or listed in their rankings to fight their champion. There is a reason why I made sure you were aware that Alvarez refused to fight for the WBC belt and was only recently reinstated into their rankings.

It's cool. Here is another tidbit for you. If the fight was mandatory...why did K2 set up a deal to fight Saunders if GBP didnt meet their financial demands. The deal was in place and confirmed by Warren and Saunders. Wouldn't that have meant GGG would have been stripped again if it was mandatory as you say.

I edited the post above to include a quote from Mauricio himself saying it was a mandatory since you don't seem to believe me. I will repeat it though:

”Champion Gennady Golovkin (Kazakhstan) has been mandated to fight a rematch with Canelo Alvarez, and negotiations are taking place,” said WBC president Mauricio Sulaiman. ”In order to allow this rematch, the WBC ordered mandatory challenger Jermall Charlo to fight Hugo Centeno for the WBC middleweight interim championship.”

https://www.************.com/2018/01...vkin-2-winner/

boxing news 24

And as for the your finishing question you seem to have missed the point I repeatedly make about Golovkin having, effectively, a get out clause in his Champions split (although potential the WBC could have adjusted this too). Golovkin could have demanded anything up to 70% and if Canelo had refused Golovkin would get to keep his belt. However it was in the interests of both to aim for a split which would enable the fight to be made since it was quite clear GBP / Canelo would never take the 30%. The only way GGG would have been stripped is if Canelo agree to take 30% of the purse and Golovkin still refused to fight him.

Anyways, man. I'm done with this, it's late here and I'm gonna go bed. Incidentally though I always meant to ask, is that username a reference to the Billy Bumbler? I've always assumed it was but never got round to asking.

[j.razor]

Of course you would be agreeing with your best canelo friend on here. I'm still waiting for you to reply to me pointing out just how sh&&ty nelo's resume is for a guy with 52 fights...

Dude you aiming at the WRONG resume cuz lil g has fought 39 fighters & ONLY 2 were good opponents AND he LOST to BOTH of them. Keep pretending tho.