Why didn't Eleider Alvarez have a rematch clause against Kovalev?

[ShoulderRoll]

Since he won the first fight he should have been in the driver's seat. Insisting on such a clause would have guaranteed him another title shot and another nice payday.

An aging fighter could certainly use that extra monetary cushion. That would have been a smart move, especially given how Top Rank dropped him right after he lost the rematch.

[pillowfists98]

That isn't how rematch clauses work. You can't have a rematch clause for a fight that was initiated by a rematch clause.

[ShoulderRoll]

That isn't how rematch clauses work. You can't have a rematch clause for a fight that was initiated by a rematch clause.

But an Alvarez rematch clause wouldn't have been for their second fight.

It would have covered a third fight in the event of an Alvarez loss.

[pillowfists98]

But an Alvarez rematch clause wouldn't have been for their second fight.

It would have covered a third fight in the event of an Alvarez loss.

The second fight happened because Kovalev exercised a rematch clause he had in the contract from the first fight. You can't throw in a rematch clause in a rematch that only happened because one of the fighters had a rematach clause.

[ShoulderRoll]

The second fight happened because Kovalev exercised a rematch clause he had in the contract from the first fight. You can't throw in a rematch clause in a rematch that only happened because one of the fighters had a rematach clause.

I see. So basically the contract terms for the second fight were already determined prior to the first fight?

[_Maxi]

I see. So basically the contract terms for the second fight were already determined prior to the first fight?

That's how it is normally. Otherwise the B side could force another rematch and the ones that do that are the A sides.

[Pigeons]

I do think Alvarez deserves another go at it. His victory in the first fight was better than Kovalev's victory in the second fight, but Kovalev has better options with Top Rank/ESPN.

I would like to see Kovalev-Beterbiev next. Alvarez would be a good fight for Ramirez's first go at 175. I'd pick Alvarez in that fight.

[lolpz]

The second fight happened because Kovalev exercised a rematch clause he had in the contract from the first fight. You can't throw in a rematch clause in a rematch that only happened because one of the fighters had a rematach clause.

This right here pretty much lol.

[Boxing Logic]

Since he won the first fight he should have been in the driver's seat. Insisting on such a clause would have guaranteed him another title shot and another nice payday.

An aging fighter could certainly use that extra monetary cushion. That would have been a smart move, especially given how Top Rank dropped him right after he lost the rematch.

What you have to remember is Alvarez was never mandatory to Kovalev, only to Stevenson. Stevenson wouldn't fight him though. Kovalev was going to fight Browne, but Browne had legal issues that Main Events didn't want to risk their date getting canceled over, so they offered the same deal to Alvarez. Since Alvarez was a voluntary opponent that Kovalev was giving a shot Alvarez did not "earn" so to speak, was not mandated to get, he wanted a rematch clause. It's sort of like, "even just giving you this chance is a risk I don't have to take, so if I'm going to give you this shot sooner than I have, I want a guaranteed shot to win it back in the event you win. Im doing you a favor giving you a chance to take my title even though I could choose to fight anyone else, it's my choice, so given that's the case, I want a rematch clause."

Probably same situation with Charlo vs Harrison. The real question is why we dont see it more often outside of Kovalev. Well, probably because no one else in the sport besides Kovalev and a few others ever face voluntary opponents, who have no belts of their own or anything, just voluntary opponents with no hardware, and nothing to offer but RISK, no one else in the sport besides Kovalev and a few others ever face voluntary opponents without belts who are actually good enough to beat them, and as a result, they never lose any voluntary fights at all, which means the rematch clauses never come up. But I bet you if Spence had lost to any of his voluntary opponents recently, or Mikey, or any PBC fighter, you'd have heard about a rematch clause there too. But since they never face voluntaries that good, and they only time they would ever lose would probably be in an in-house unification (and rematch clauses are not as customary in unificatications), we dont hear about them very often.

Like if Kovalev was with Al Haymon, the Alvarez fight never would have happened. Haymon probably would have advised Kovalev, "you have a belt. Alvarez has nothing. He brings nothing to the table but risk. No one in the US knows who he is, but he's very dangerous. High risk, low reward, the exact opposite of my business model." But because Kovalev is with a main events who either due to being true believers in boxing, or maybe because maybe it's economically necessary for them to deliver competitive matchups to keep their small outfit afloat, who knows, they actually put him in good matchups it seems pretty much as often as they can find the opponents to fight him, and so he fought Alvarez, Alvarez won, and we heard about the rematch clause specific to Kovalev again. But as I went over, lots of fighters have them, we just don't hear about it because they don't lose and I guess they're small enough fights that it's agreed in house to not talk about it publicly unless it comes up.

[siablo14]

But an Alvarez rematch clause wouldn't have been for their second fight.

It would have covered a third fight in the event of an Alvarez loss.

Roll, i am appalled you didn't know this.

The second fight happened because Kovalev exercised a rematch clause he had in the contract from the first fight. You can't throw in a rematch clause in a rematch that only happened because one of the fighters had a rematach clause.