Joshua V Wilder: What do YOU think would be fair?

[Laligalaliga]

TBH, being generous is 70/30.

[uppercut510]

if wilder beats fury 55-45 is fair. if hearn really wanted that fight he would have at least offered wilder 35% before. as long as they work out something fair I don't care but this diva act aj is playing and his fans are defending is played out. These guys need to fight, that's the bottom line

[SeGoodland]

I think that its a little more complicated that just saying 50-50, 60-40 or 70-30. You have to look at the entire situation objectively.

Right now, AJ is ranked No.1 HW by the majority of the mainstream ranking systems and he has 3 of the 4 belts. By that definition, it should be a 75-25 split but that isn't fair really.

Wilder could be the lineal champ if the fight goes ahead in April but I don't think that Fury has represented that 'title' with much distinction so it feels that the lineage doesn't really mean much and it has only resurfaced as a selling tool in order to 1. Hype the Wilder v Fury fight, Champion v 'Champion' and 2. Wilder wants it to add weight to his claim of a split 50-50. Yes, Wilder is the WBC champ, its the most 'prestigious' of the 4 belts so that could be worth a little more. So lets say, based on just the belts, its a 65-35 split.

On the other hand, love it or hate it, Matchroom has been consistently putting on major events in front of 10,000's of fans. The HW world doesn't revolve around the US anymore. If its a big enough fight, PPV in the US would sell well, DAZN subscriptions may go up, UK PPV sales will be huge as well. So, my point is, AJ shouldn't have to leave the UK really, he's bringing more to the table. Wilder showed willingness to travel to Moscow, why not London? That's not anything that can change the split imo.

65-35 is fair. Rematch clauses for both. UK first fight, US second fight. Rematch split 60-40.

How much more fair can it be?

[Laligalaliga]

Two ways to go about it 60/40 on everything (or close to it) gets it done and both make a ton of money.

Or they could get tricky and do something like Joshua gets 70/30 UK revenue with Wilder getting 70/30 of the US end, with the neutral stuff being split 50/50 or maybe Joshua getting a slight edge like 55/45. The the total split ends up whatever it may be with both sides working hard on their ends to maximize revenue but with the other getting their beak wet enough to help out the other side a bit on each end.

The bottom is probably most fair because that is what they are bringing to the table so they should reap the benefits of that. The percentages could be played with to make it work out right but the basic idea would be sound and both would still make a ton of money.

If wilder was the guy with 3belts , stadium attendance and ppv, no US guy here will be saying 60/40.
This fight at most generous for wilder is 70/30 irrespective of fury win.

Let's not act like wilder can generate shhhit money with his name. When you have no ppv record, you don't have much leverage of ppv revenues.

[Laligalaliga]

Ask all of the world's leading experts. I have no obligation to defend another man's opinion. I don't argue opinions, and I rarely offer mine.

The fact is that Wilder has two wins over consensus top three fighters. Joshua doesn't have any. So even though Joshua's resume is stronger over all, it's hilarious when AJ fans say Wilder hasn't fought anybody considering Wilder is the only one of the two that has faced top 3 fighters.

I will appreciate if you acknowledge that at fight 30, wilder was still fighting retired Manchester United players ranked above 50 and earning far below 1mil.
That's all I need from you Bro.

[SeGoodland]

Ask all of the world's leading experts. I have no obligation to defend another man's opinion. I don't argue opinions, and I rarely offer mine.

The fact is that Wilder has two wins over consensus top three fighters. Joshua doesn't have any. So even though Joshua's resume is stronger over all, it's hilarious when AJ fans say Wilder hasn't fought anybody considering Wilder is the only one of the two that has faced top 3 fighters.

Consensus; a general agreement.
I, and a lot of others, disagree that Ortiz and Stiverne are top 3 fighters so you can stick your consensus up your ass.

By your own definition, Wilder has fought nobodies.

[The Big Dunn]

Consensus; a general agreement.
I, and a lot of others, disagree that Ortiz and Stiverne are top 3 fighters so you can stick your consensus up your ass.

By your own definition, Wilder has fought nobodies.

You're only disagreeing just to take away from Wilder's win. Any rational fan knows they were top 3 HWT's when Wilder beat them.

Would be like arguing Povetkin isn't a top 3 HWT just to shade AJ.

[that g]

i almost feel like they should offer him 45% just to smoke him out. I don't believe wilder wants that fight, and even if given what he wants, he will still lose his pen.

my take? offer 60%-35%, with the extra 5% going to the winner. add a one sided rematch clause, as is the case for all A-side,B-side negotiations.

[Boksfan]

i almost feel like they should offer him 45% just to smoke him out. I don't believe wilder wants that fight, and even if given what he wants, he will still lose his pen.

my take? offer 60%-35%, with the extra 5% going to the winner. add a one sided rematch clause, as is the case for all A-side,B-side negotiations.

There is never "extra going to the winner" in boxing, let's be real and not talk fantasy.

[that g]

There is never "extra going to the winner" in boxing, let's be real and not talk fantasy.

there's a first time for everything. the fact that it's never been doesn't mean it will never be.
also the idea of having a victory purse or reward is not unheard of. the winner always takes any belts on the line.