Crawford asked Hearn to fight the winner of Garcia vs Vargas

[Curt Henning]

as long as the skin colors of the people involved suit your liking, you wouldnt care one bit.

But I would bet a steak dinner that if it were Arum or Hearn, you would have a completely different take. Unfortunately your posting history shows that you see most issues through the prism of race, which makes you blind to the bigger picture........

Terry,

newsflash...im the same skin color as arum and hearn..although im neither british nor ***ish....me and al haymon are not the same skin color...ive posted my picture here multiple times...im a white male from a beachfront community in RI....i will gladly prove this to you if you want to dispute it

its hilarious how some of you cant fathom that a white man would defend haymon and have a black male in his avatar...lol....it, like, blows your mind

[bballchump11]

wrong. I do not believe he is stealing from his fighters, and I challenge you to find a single post anywhere, anytime, that states otherwise. Dont put words in my mouth.


But he is violating federal law by having a financial interest in the promotional activities of his fighters. Whether or not he personally profits from that interest is irrelevant. It is still a violation of the Ali Act.

Eddie Hearn just violated the Ali act when moving the Jacobs vs Chavez fight to Arizona.

[OnePunch]

Terry,

newsflash...im the same skin color as arum and hearn..although im neither british nor ***ish....me and al haymon are not the same skin color...ive posted my picture here multiple times...im a white male from a beachfront community in RI....i will gladly prove this to you if you want to dispute it

I never said you were black. I am well aware of what color you claim to be, and have no reason to dispute it. But that has nothing to do with my point about how you frame most issues.

As to Haymon, yes he is successful, yes he is powerful, yes he pays well, and yes he has done alot of good and brought alot of transparency to fighters that they might not have had before. But the fact remains that he is a licensed manager, acting as a promoter. Plain and simple. And maybe you dont think thats a bad thing, but it is against the law.

[OnePunch]

Eddie Hearn just violated the Ali act when moving the Jacobs vs Chavez fight to Arizona.

he came very very close, no doubt. If he had been unsuccessful in getting that TRO, he would definitely been in violation had he went ahead with the event anyways......

[Curt Henning]

I never said you were black. I am well aware of what color you claim to be, and have no reason to dispute it. But that has nothing to do with my point about how you frame most issues.

As to Haymon, yes he is successful, yes he is powerful, yes he pays well, and yes he has done alot of good and brought alot of transparency to fighters that they might not have had before. But the fact remains that he is a licensed manager, acting as a promoter. Plain and simple. And maybe you dont think thats a bad thing, but it is against the law.

possessing marijuana was once against the law...purchasing it as well....

if hes doing the fighters right and getting us some good fights i cant complain

[N/A]

wrong. I do not believe he is stealing from his fighters, and I challenge you to find a single post anywhere, anytime, that states otherwise. Dont put words in my mouth.


But he is violating federal law by having a financial interest in the promotional activities of his fighters. Whether or not he personally profits from that interest is irrelevant. It is still a violation of the Ali Act.

He doesn't have a financial interest in the promotional activities of his fighters. He only gets paid his managerial commission.

[OnePunch]

possessing marijuana was once against the law...purchasing it as well....

if hes doing the fighters right and getting us some good fights i cant complain

and you are free to have that opinion. Perhaps the law should be amended to allow managers to take an expanded role.

Believing that is fine, but its not necessary to mock those that disagree......

[OnePunch]

He doesn't have a financial interest in the promotional activities of his fighters. He only gets paid his managerial commission.

he controls the gate revenue, broadcast rights sales, advertising sales, and all related event revenue. What he does with it after the fact is irrelevant.......

Showtime / Fox writing checks to Haymon Sports constitutes a financial interest. The arena paying site fees or ticket sales to Haymon Sports constitutes a financial interest. Its beyond belief that this point is even arguable. And even if Haymon gives every nickel of that revenue to the fighters, the law is there to protect those fighters from less honorable people.....

[Curt Henning]

and you are free to have that opinion. Perhaps the law should be amended to allow managers to take an expanded role.

Believing that is fine, but its not necessary to mock those that disagree......

im not really trying to mock you..i just think youre being unreasonable.....the "law" was created to protect guys who were being blatantly ripped off and upset about it

no one is upset with haymon....they praise him....so let him continue to operate in peace until someone complains....i feel thats what a reasonable person would do

[OnePunch]

im not really trying to mock you..i just think youre being unreasonable.....the "law" was created to protect guys who were being blatantly ripped off and upset about it

no one is upset with haymon....they praise him....so let him continue to operate in peace until someone complains....i feel thats what a reasonable person would do

Funny though that nobody here cares one bit about the Ali Act. Until of course Eddie Hearn almost violated it. Then somehow that would have been a big deal. Even though nobody was harmed whether or not Chavez fought.

And for the record, I am consistent with application of the Ali Act. Had Hearn not gotten that TRO from the court, and went ahead with the fight anyways, his license should have been yanked.....