Whyte mandatory will be ordered in 2021

[kafkod]

If you choose to be ignorant and blind to facts and reason, I can't help you buddy. Have a nice day.

Nice one mate!

[kafkod]

I don’t know what to do with conspiracy theories.

The WBC said it was a final eliminator and the winner would be Wilder’s mandatory.

Your response: they’re liars!

Well, what can I do with that?

The WBC did not say that the winner would be Wilder's mandatory. They said that the winner would be second mandatory, next in line after Breazeale, which is where Whyte should have been anyway, and Wilder vs Breazeale hadn't even been ordered at that point.

Mike Coppinger, a reporter who has been employed by USA Today, Ring Magazine, Fox, the Athletic etc. says Ortiz will make more than $7 million.

Your response: He’s a liar!

Well, what can I do with that?

I’m sure the moon landing was faked, big foot is real, Elvis is alive and Area 51 is hosting alien experiments.

Somebody has been pulling projected pie in the sky PPV numbers out of their arse again. Use your brain, FFS.

[DaNeutral.]

Forget all this WBC crap. If Wilder was a true champion he would WANT to fight Dillian Whyte yet hes made it quite clear he DOESNT WANT to fight Whyte and will NOT fight until it HAS TO HAPPEN. WBC corruption or not Wilder is ducking Dillian Whyte. He said he would Freeze him out and he has frozen him out.


Whyte is a big hitter in his prime. Thats what the real problem is here. Look at Wilders resume it tells you all you need to know about this joke ducker and his protection squad.

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

They said that the winner would be second mandatory, next in line after Breazeale, which is where Whyte should have been anyway

This is incorrect. Until Whyte fought a final eliminator, he had no claim to being a mandatory. He refused to fight Ortiz in a final eliminator, stalled for a long time, and then fought Rivas in a final eliminator instead. But he was never going to become mandatory without winning a final eliminator.

[ShaneMosleySr]

If what you’re saying is true, boxingscene.com didn’t report the news correctly. They called the fight a final eliminator and said the winner would be the mandatory to Wilder.

As for the Coppinger report, I’m sorry you believe he makes everything up, such as PPV numbers. I don’t know what to tell you. I believe he tells the truth and there’s no evidence he lies.

The WBC did not say that the winner would be Wilder's mandatory. They said that the winner would be second mandatory, next in line after Breazeale, which is where Whyte should have been anyway, and Wilder vs Breazeale hadn't even been ordered at that point.



Somebody has been pulling projected pie in the sky PPV numbers out of their arse again. Use your brain, FFS.

[kafkod]

This is incorrect. Until Whyte fought a final eliminator, he had no claim to being a mandatory. He refused to fight Ortiz in a final eliminator, stalled for a long time, and then fought Rivas in a final eliminator instead. But he was never going to become mandatory without winning a final eliminator.

Whyte was not offered a final eliminator for the WBC mandatory spot against Ortiz

There is a difference between "mandatory" and "second mandatory".

Don't you get it?

A final eliminator for the position of second mandatory is an oxymoron, a classic piece of WBC bullshit.

Whyte had been WBC Silver Champion and No1 contender for 2 years. He paid sanctioning fees to the WBC to fight for and defend the Silver title because he believed that holding it gave him the automatic right to a mandatory shot at the full title, but that turned out not to be the case.

This why the WBC never publish or announce the rules around any of their multiple secondary title belts. Because that way, they can make the rules up as they go along!

If nobody knows what it actually means to hold a particular title ... it can mean whatever the WBC wants it to mean!

In Dillian Whyte's case, holding the WBC Silver title meant nothing except that the WBC were paid sanctioning fees every time he got in the ring.

[Jax teller]

If what you’re saying is true, boxingscene.com didn’t report the news correctly. They called the fight a final eliminator and said the winner would be the mandatory to Wilder.

As for the Coppinger report, I’m sorry you believe he makes everything up, such as PPV numbers. I don’t know what to tell you. I believe he tells the truth and there’s no evidence he lies.

Why are you being deliberately ignorant? Breazeale was announnced mando before the Ortiz fight option was about.

https://www.fightsports.tv/whyte-to-fight-wbc-decision-on-wilder-mandatory/#

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/boxing/9336629/dillian-whyte-mandatory-deontay-wilder-oscar-rivas-600-days-wbc/

[kafkod]

If what you’re saying is true, boxingscene.com didn’t report the news correctly. They called the fight a final eliminator and said the winner would be the mandatory to Wilder.

No, they reported it correctly. But a lot of people just latched on to "final eliminator" and ignored what it said about the second mandatory position.

As for the Coppinger report, I’m sorry you believe he makes everything up, such as PPV numbers. I don’t know what to tell you. I believe he tells the truth and there’s no evidence he lies.

Is there any evidence that Fox or PBC have already guaranteed Ortiz more than $7million for fighting Wilder? Because if there is, I haven't seen it.

IMO, Coppinger got that figure from projected PPV buys, aka, pie in the sky numbers.

[ShaneMosleySr]

Read what I linked too about Ortiz-Whyte please.

We’ll see Ortiz’s purse soon so I’m done caring.

No, they reported it correctly. But a lot of people just latched on to "final eliminator" and ignored what it said about the second mandatory position.



Is there any evidence that Fox or PBC have already guaranteed Ortiz more than $7million for fighting Wilder? Because if there is, I haven't seen it.

IMO, Coppinger got that figure from projected PPV buys, aka, pie in the sky numbers.

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

Whyte was not offered a final eliminator for the WBC mandatory spot against Ortiz

There is a difference between "mandatory" and "second mandatory".

Winning a final eliminator guarantees you a title shot. It doesn't necessarily guarantee you the next title shot. Breazeale was already mandatory because he won a final eliminator. Whyte was never going to become mandatory without winning a final eliminator and was always going to have to wait until after Breazeale.

A final eliminator for the position of second mandatory is an oxymoron

No, it's not. Final eliminator = guaranteed title shot. It doesn't necessarily mean next title shot.

Whyte had been WBC Silver Champion and No1 contender for 2 years. He paid sanctioning fees to the WBC to fight for and defend the Silver title because he believed that holding it gave him the automatic right to a mandatory shot at the full title, but that turned out not to be the case.

If he really believed that, it's only because Eddie Hearn lied to him. Holding the silver title doesn't give you the automatic right to a mandatory shot. Holding the silver title gives you the automatic right to a high rating so you can hopefully be in position for eliminators.

UK fans are so gullible. Hearn lies to you guys day in and day out and you repeat his lies as the gospel.