Contracts

First topic message reminder :

After another victory for the Brothers K this weekend, quite a few posters have been highlighting the Klits contracts as the stumbling block to a fight with David Haye amongst others.

The term "slave contract" has been bandied about and the general feel was that the contracts were heavily favoured towards the champs.

On another thread discussing Samuel Peter, a poster mentioned about after his first loss, he went away and got a few wins to make himself the mandatory challenger again. Something that David Haye doesnt want to do.

So my question is, how much power do the champions have in the contract negotiations when facing a mandatory?

If Chisora had been a mandatory, what would have been the difference in purse and contract details for example.

It will be interesting to read a bio of them (and beonte) akin to the Don King bio. I'd like to read how they washed away the roid issue.

The accusation of Chisora not getting compensation comes from Warren I believe, does anyone know how much he gave in compensation to Glen Johnson for the numerous times Calzaghe pulled out of scheduled fights. Have said it before but the compensation argument only has any validity if it was either in the contract to pay it or is common practice for the uninjured fighter to be compensated in the event of a cancellation, otherwise to my mind the brothers are being held up to a different standard than everyone else.

But since when is business dealings the measure of a man? I think you will find that few on here dispute that they drive a hard bargain and take advantage of their position when it comes to offering contracts. But its not at all unique to boxers in their positions. And why ignore and dismiss almost all the evidence that does actually fit with their image of good people? Because this seems to what you are doing. Ali, quite rightly, gets credit for the good stuff he did outside the ring, for his efforts in civil rights, the stand over the War,his later humanitarian work and usinghis status to do good. Why not do the same for the Klitschkos. Its like the people that believe Ali was a scumbag and a fake for what he did to Frazier. I cant ever condone or justify what he did to Frazier whether under the guise of promoting (which it did) or typical Ali mischief (which it wasnt). And like I say, there are people out there that just cant forgive him for this and as a result dont like him. I can accept that, even if I dont share their view. But it would perturb me if they refused to even acknowledge the good stuff he did or readily dismiss it as irrelevant just because it didnt fit with their view of him.

I may be wrong but sometimes azania I cant help feel if you are not just drawn to controversy. You are quite often the first to defend controversial acts and while not neccessarily condoning them you often excuse it quite easily as "controversy sells", "money talks" or by playing it down and telling people to chill over it or get down from the high horse or offering validating reasons for the action. But when it comes to someone like the Klitschkos with a relatively clean image and a pretty extensive dossier of evidence that would support this image you seem determined to find the flaws, magnify them and then use them to try and define the person. Is it possible you just dont like boxers to have this kind of image and the fact they dont court controversy puts you off them?

I get the impression it woudnt be enough if people accepted that the Klitschkos were demanding business men, nothing short of seeing them as complete fakes or inherantly bad people would satisfy you.

While you dont refer to them as scumbags, when you say they make someone like Don King appear like Jesus its not hard to read between the lines and the intention is obvious.

The same way as comparing them to Ottke insinuates they are protected, stay at home champions that rely on favourable judging and reffing.

manos de piedra wrote:If you dont like them, think they are pimps or phoneys, hate the clothes they were or whatever that fine. But you are banging on about other stuff thats completely inconsisted and designed to fit this negative profile you have of them. You brought up the home fight thing - bogus, all the more so compared with other top fighters that dont get any flak.

Then its the purse split with Chisora. 90/10 split. First off - hardly the rule with the Klitschkos. The majority of their opponents get 80/20 or above. You said the board would be in uproar if Khan did the same - he more or less did but strangely you arent putting the boot in on him. Lets look at some other top fighters splits when they are holding all the cards against opponents - two recent examples:

Pacquaio $12m, Clottey $1.2m (circa 90/10)
Mayweather $25m, Ortiz $2m (circa 95/5)

Like I said above, if you dont like the Klitschkos personality or style thats fine. Theres plenty of athletes whos personality I dont like for one reason or another.

But you are firing abuse or accusations at them from all sides most of which is either not particularly true, distorted or consistent with what other fighters in similar positions do. If you dont like them thats fine. Your entitled to that. My problem is with the other stuff which I think is being manipulated to paint them as something overly negative because you have a dislike for them.

They arent beyond criticism, I just think yours are somewhat irrational and disproportianate to the offences.

The % of the purse isn't the major thing here but the actual money they get is, $1.2m is a reasonable purse regardless of what Pacquiao is earning but the 100/200k (different figures reported from different sources) that Chisora got for a heavyweight title fight is a joke, hell Harrison got far more than that by fighting Haye.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:If you dont like them, think they are pimps or phoneys, hate the clothes they were or whatever that fine. But you are banging on about other stuff thats completely inconsisted and designed to fit this negative profile you have of them. You brought up the home fight thing - bogus, all the more so compared with other top fighters that dont get any flak.

Then its the purse split with Chisora. 90/10 split. First off - hardly the rule with the Klitschkos. The majority of their opponents get 80/20 or above. You said the board would be in uproar if Khan did the same - he more or less did but strangely you arent putting the boot in on him. Lets look at some other top fighters splits when they are holding all the cards against opponents - two recent examples:

Pacquaio $12m, Clottey $1.2m (circa 90/10)
Mayweather $25m, Ortiz $2m (circa 95/5)

Like I said above, if you dont like the Klitschkos personality or style thats fine. Theres plenty of athletes whos personality I dont like for one reason or another.

But you are firing abuse or accusations at them from all sides most of which is either not particularly true, distorted or consistent with what other fighters in similar positions do. If you dont like them thats fine. Your entitled to that. My problem is with the other stuff which I think is being manipulated to paint them as something overly negative because you have a dislike for them.

They arent beyond criticism, I just think yours are somewhat irrational and disproportianate to the offences.

The % of the purse isn't the major thing here but the actual money they get is, $1.2m is a reasonable purse regardless of what Pacquiao is earning but the 100/200k (different figures reported from different sources) that Chisora got for a heavyweight title fight is a joke, hell Harrison got far more than that by fighting Haye.

thats because he was doing his mate a favour.

yep ghostly its a very fair point

Mystiroakey - can you please check your PMs

rowley wrote:The accusation of Chisora not getting compensation comes from Warren I believe, does anyone know how much he gave in compensation to Glen Johnson for the numerous times Calzaghe pulled out of scheduled fights. Have said it before but the compensation argument only has any validity if it was either in the contract to pay it or is common practice for the uninjured fighter to be compensated in the event of a cancellation, otherwise to my mind the brothers are being held up to a different standard than everyone else.

Oh thats ok then. Warren didn't pay Glen Johnson so as payback K2 dont pay Chisora. Wonderful

Not even close to being the point I am making as I'm sure you know az the point I am making is two fold firstly if warren has been in a similar situation and equally failed to pay out compensation it is hugely hypocritical for him to criticise others and the second more important point is if it is not common practice to pay compensation it is surely unfair to criticise the brothers for not doing so as it is holding them up to a higher standard of conduct

is the problem more about the fact that the brothers can be blamed, whereas most other fighters cant(only there promoters)

So it's the fault of the fighter in the case of the K bros but the fault of the promoter for everyone else? I'm slightly confused here, could you explain.

if your gonna fight and run yourself- you have to understand you are gonna be more in the fireing line.

everyone has been brandishing boxing promoters as 'gangsters' ever since i was born.

the fact that they act like normal promoters and are esentially the
fighters as well-Yet have this 'whollier than know attitude' the
problem, when they are no better than every other promoter out there who
all get stick.

people have difficulty seperating brand k2 and the fighters themselves

Still don't understand that.

i think its fair to have a pop at the k2's as promoters, in the same way it is to have a pop at other promoters- simple as that.

That is nothing to do with them as fighters, i think the situation confusses the arguments

Bernd Boente is there promoter.

Where to start? It seems like today has been the day for ridiculous statements and hyperbole.

Az - you really need to learn when to leave something there. Were you born on October 28th? (St Jude's day, patron saint of lost causes). You're not offering anything new - everything is a cyclical post - surely this has been done to death - no?

azania wrote:Don King has also paid med bills for injured fighters. I believe he covered a chunk of G Mac's bills. Contributed to Obama's campaign fund also.

Perhaps if he'd given the money he spent on Obama's campaign fund to GMac's continued care, as opposed to cutting all ties, bitterly whinging that he "quit like a dog" and leaving him in the lurch, I wouldn't have this overriding image of him as a sewer dwelling vertebrate. I'd describe him as a rat, but that would be unfair on rats.

Steffan wrote:Think I would actually cheer on Haye if he fought him now as Haye has proven that he actually does have some heart

What - by throwing a couple of punches at Chisora and trying to beat his own trainer to insensibility with a tripod?

azania wrote:Fair enough. I concede. K2 are wonderful gentlemen and you are a man of great character and substance.

When one concedes, traditionally, one stops speaking, without continuation.

I think I could speak for the majority in saying that everyone on here views the K-bros in shades of grey. No-one sees them as infallible saints, however - for their "image" to be "hypocrisy" only because of tough negotiating isn't fair at all.

Finally, please don't make things up - its very rude. You were bandying about the 100k remark for a while - and yet its 300k - and frankly - for a non-top 10 challenger - 300k in a 95/5//90/10 split is probably fair.

Or did Chisora deserve better on the back of a loss to Tyson Fury and a victory over Helenius?

rowley wrote:Not even close to being the point I am making as I'm sure you know az the point I am making is two fold firstly if warren has been in a similar situation and equally failed to pay out compensation it is hugely hypocritical for him to criticise others and the second more important point is if it is not common practice to pay compensation it is surely unfair to criticise the brothers for not doing so as it is holding them up to a higher standard of conduct

Yep, Warren's a hypocrite. We all know that. Even he knows that. But K2 are fine, upstanding gentlemen, who help the starving, feed the homeless, provide a pension plan for old retired boxers. They are forgiven because they screwed Del and cost him a lot of money. Oh and they made up for him by diving him a shot 12 months later. Bravo.

The difference is I expect Warren, King, Arum, GBP to lie, cheat and steal. K2 are held up as paragon of boxing virtue. Whilst in reality they screw boxers just as much as other promoters do.

It would be interesting to read a no holds barred bio of them.

oxring wrote:

Steffan wrote:Think I would actually cheer on Haye if he fought him now as Haye has proven that he actually does have some heart

What - by throwing a couple of punches at Chisora and trying to beat his own trainer to insensibility with a tripod?

A couple more punches than he threw against Wlad. These actually had some conviction in there as well

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Bernd Boente is there promoter.

He's their manager. K2 is the promotional company. No doubt BB has a very high position in K2 promotions.

Steffan wrote:

oxring wrote:

Steffan wrote:Think I would actually cheer on Haye if he fought him now as Haye has proven that he actually does have some heart

What - by throwing a couple of punches at Chisora and trying to beat his own trainer to insensibility with a tripod?

A couple more punches than he threw against Wlad. These actually had some conviction in there as well

Very droll, Steffan.

azania wrote:


The difference is I expect Warren, King, Arum, GBP to lie, cheat and steal. K2 are held up as paragon of boxing virtue. Whilst in reality they screw boxers just as much as other promoters do.

Again az you put words in our mouth when has anyone on here said they are paragons of virtue. I have said they come across well in interviews and represent the sport well, positions I maintain. I have never argued they do not drive a hard bargain or utilise their position on top of the tree to make a deal as stacked in their favour as possible, I however unlike yourself acknowledge that throughout the history of the sport countless others have done the same, However one further point I would make is to the best of my knowledge the brothers have never failed to pay out in full the amount stipulated to a fighter in their contracts with the brothers, this is not something that can be said of at least two of the people they apparently screw boxers just as much as.

The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

rowley wrote:

azania wrote:


The difference is I expect Warren, King, Arum, GBP to lie, cheat and steal. K2 are held up as paragon of boxing virtue. Whilst in reality they screw boxers just as much as other promoters do.

Again az you put words in our mouth when has anyone on here said they are paragons of virtue. I have said they come across well in interviews and represent the sport well, positions I maintain. I have never argued they do not drive a hard bargain or utilise their position on top of the tree to make a deal as stacked in their favour as possible, I however unlike yourself acknowledge that throughout the history of the sport countless others have done the same, However one further point I would make is to the best of my knowledge the brothers have never failed to pay out in full the amount stipulated to a fighter in their contracts with the brothers, this is not something that can be said of at least two of the people they apparently screw boxers just as much as.

And their tricks do not seem more morally reprehensible than the stunts that "Sugar" used to pull. Burley's career never reached the heights it should have - and SRR is greatly to blame.

Even the most hardcore of Burley fans (that's you, jeff) - don't hate on SRR the way you attack K2.

Jeff - message from Shah for you on the logistics article.

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

You innocent. Stop being so naive manos.

They are evil remember - they probably threaten small children or Chernobyl victims that they've kidnapped as part of their humanitarian work - and are holding hostage unless their opponents agree to sign.

It gets tiring hear about what gentleman they are, average fighters fighting in a terrible era.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It gets tiring hear about what gentleman they are, average fighters fighting in a terrible era.

So don't listen. It probably grates on their ears being described as average in a terrible era - they still manage to act with dignity.

I genuinely think I am going to beat a retreat from this thread as there is nowhere left for it to go, if indeed it is not already there, other than the ridiculous. Az you have raised a number of points to support your arguments, most of which I believe any reasonable person would agree have been rebutted, disproven or shown to be completely over the top and yet still you persist with not even a glimmer to suggest you have taken any of the counter arguments on board or that there is likely to be a softening of your stance, worryingly the exact contrary appears to be happening, sorry, but any opinion that is impervious to reason is unhealthy.

oxring wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It gets tiring hear about what gentleman they are, average fighters fighting in a terrible era.

So don't listen. It probably grates on their ears being described as average in a terrible era - they still manage to act with dignity.

When the board is littered with Klitschko article after Klitschko it's a little difficult to avoid. You think they act with dignity while I don't Oxy, apparently viewing them in a negative way leads to condescending ripostes.

rowley wrote:I genuinely think I am going to beat a retreat from this thread as there is nowhere left for it to go, if indeed it is not already there, other than the ridiculous. Az you have raised a number of points to support your arguments, most of which I believe any reasonable person would agree have been rebutted, disproven or shown to be completely over the top and yet still you persist with not even a glimmer to suggest you have taken any of the counter arguments on board or that there is likely to be a softening of your stance, worryingly the exact contrary appears to be happening, sorry, but any opinion that is impervious to reason is unhealthy.

+1 for this.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:When the board is littered with Klitschko article after Klitschko it's a little difficult to avoid. You think they act with dignity while I don't Oxy, apparently viewing them in a negative way leads to condescending ripostes.

Point is ghosty - what we're being sold is that their ENTIRE image is a lie, fraud and a sham and that they make Don King look like Jesus Christ.

Aside from the fact that I consider the latter sentence offensive - its hyperbolous criticism - and so of course there will be a harsh-seeming negative response to it. You may feel aggrieved, but none of it is personal - its merely that your comments have tended to merge and blend with the more "curious" ramblings of az or pbf.

rowley wrote:

azania wrote:


The difference is I expect Warren, King, Arum, GBP to lie, cheat and steal. K2 are held up as paragon of boxing virtue. Whilst in reality they screw boxers just as much as other promoters do.

Again az you put words in our mouth when has anyone on here said they are paragons of virtue. I have said they come across well in interviews and represent the sport well, positions I maintain. I have never argued they do not drive a hard bargain or utilise their position on top of the tree to make a deal as stacked in their favour as possible, I however unlike yourself acknowledge that throughout the history of the sport countless others have done the same, However one further point I would make is to the best of my knowledge the brothers have never failed to pay out in full the amount stipulated to a fighter in their contracts with the brothers, this is not something that can be said of at least two of the people they apparently screw boxers just as much as.

Well you for one said (above) that they handle themselves with dignity. Its just a public froont. John Gotti handled himself with dignity in public <----- chance for you to run off on another wild tangent completely out of context.

Team Khan drive a hard bargain also. But different reaction to their bargaining prowess. £200k for the world HW title. Slave wages in context. As Ghosty pointed out. Richard Dunn (voluntary defence) got £200k 30 years ago. 80/20 split.

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

This is the worlds HW title. A passport to riches. Every boxer wants a piece of that action of to tell their grandkids they fought for it.

oxring wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

You innocent. Stop being so naive manos.

They are evil remember - they probably threaten small children or Chernobyl victims that they've kidnapped as part of their humanitarian work - and are holding hostage unless their opponents agree to sign.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

This is the worlds HW title. A passport to riches. Every boxer wants a piece of that action of to tell their grandkids they fought for it.

So surely - its quite nice that they give random boxers the chance to fight for the prize? Unlike sugar ray, for instance, or Hagler, Hearns and Leonard with McCallum (or, to a lesser extent, with Curry)...

If that zzzzzzzzzz means that you're ridiculous statements have finally exhausted you, I'm glad.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

oxring wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It gets tiring hear about what gentleman they are, average fighters fighting in a terrible era.

So don't listen. It probably grates on their ears being described as average in a terrible era - they still manage to act with dignity.

When the board is littered with Klitschko article after Klitschko it's a little difficult to avoid. You think they act with dignity while I don't Oxy, apparently viewing them in a negative way leads to condescending ripostes.

They are beyond criticism. Criticise them and you belong with the likes of Jeffrey Dalmer or a Canadian seal clubber.

oxring wrote:

rowley wrote:I genuinely think I am going to beat a retreat from this thread as there is nowhere left for it to go, if indeed it is not already there, other than the ridiculous. Az you have raised a number of points to support your arguments, most of which I believe any reasonable person would agree have been rebutted, disproven or shown to be completely over the top and yet still you persist with not even a glimmer to suggest you have taken any of the counter arguments on board or that there is likely to be a softening of your stance, worryingly the exact contrary appears to be happening, sorry, but any opinion that is impervious to reason is unhealthy.

+1 for this.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:When the board is littered with Klitschko article after Klitschko it's a little difficult to avoid. You think they act with dignity while I don't Oxy, apparently viewing them in a negative way leads to condescending ripostes.

Point is ghosty - what we're being sold is that their ENTIRE image is a lie, fraud and a sham and that they make Don King look like Jesus Christ.

Aside from the fact that I consider the latter sentence offensive - its hyperbolous criticism - and so of course there will be a harsh-seeming negative response to it. You may feel aggrieved, but none of it is personal - its merely that your comments have tended to merge and blend with the more "curious" ramblings of az or pbf.

The King comparisons as a person are very far from the truth as I imagine they are good people in every day life but from a boxing perspective I think they take there standing a bit too far, banning the OFAH them tune was a step too far for me. The contracts they offer are a joke and when you're a fighter like Chisora you have no option but to accept it, as soon as someone stood up to them in Haye we saw them for what they are.

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

This is the worlds HW title. A passport to riches. Every boxer wants a piece of that action of to tell their grandkids they fought for it.

So surely - its quite nice that they give random boxers the chance to fight for the prize? Unlike sugar ray, for instance, or Hagler, Hearns and Leonard with McCallum (or, to a lesser extent, with Curry)...

If that zzzzzzzzzz means that you're ridiculous statements have finally exhausted you, I'm glad.

Very nice indeed. Stack the whole event against the opponent. Tell then when to go to a press conference, what music to choose, when to take a dump, when to wrap their hands and pay them slave wages for their trouble. I dont like people who carry on with a hloier than thou attitude whilst remaining a shyster behind the scenes. Thats why I couldn't tolerate Sugar Ray Leonard.

At least King for all his sins was fan friendly. These shysters deliver crap cards, crap fights and slave wages in comparison.

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

This is the worlds HW title. A passport to riches. Every boxer wants a piece of that action of to tell their grandkids they fought for it.

So surely - its quite nice that they give random boxers the chance to fight for the prize? Unlike sugar ray, for instance, or Hagler, Hearns and Leonard with McCallum (or, to a lesser extent, with Curry)...

If that zzzzzzzzzz means that you're ridiculous statements have finally exhausted you, I'm glad.

Very nice indeed. Stack the whole event against the opponent. Tell then when to go to a press conference, what music to choose, when to take a dump, when to wrap their hands and pay them slave wages for their trouble. I dont like people who carry on with a hloier than thou attitude whilst remaining a shyster behind the scenes. Thats why I couldn't tolerate Sugar Ray Leonard.

I hope you attack mayweather and amir khan over their contracts because their terms are the same as the klitschkos.

Good point chris. The whole board attacked Khan and his team for whatever he does.

Welcome to 606v2 by the way. Good to have a newbie here.

Dont P me off though. My bark is worse than my bite

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The Klitschkos dont force anyone to a sign a contract to fight them azania.

This is the worlds HW title. A passport to riches. Every boxer wants a piece of that action of to tell their grandkids they fought for it.

So surely - its quite nice that they give random boxers the chance to fight for the prize? Unlike sugar ray, for instance, or Hagler, Hearns and Leonard with McCallum (or, to a lesser extent, with Curry)...

If that zzzzzzzzzz means that you're ridiculous statements have finally exhausted you, I'm glad.

It's all relative to who you have fought and even the harshest critics of Hagler, Hearns and Leonard will accept their level of opposition was sublime, when you're fighting poor fighter after poor fighter it's a different story. Lets look at Mayweather and Cotto, Cotto is getting a reportedly staggering $30mil for that fight, it is pure speculation but I would wager Mayweather could have got him to sign for far less than that, his opposition to tend to get paid very well especially in comparison to what Arum offers them.

I think that Hagler and/or Hearns should have fought McCallum and it will always be a strike against them but they had a real money spinner in their sights, Robinson rightly gets criticism for the Burley affair and I do seem to be in the minority who questions his opposition. I beat the brothers with the same stick I beat past fighters with.

azania wrote:Good point chris. The whole board attacked Khan and his team for whatever he does.

Welcome to 606v2 by the way. Good to have a newbie here.

Dont P me off though. My bark is worse than my bite

haha thanks i will remember that.

anyonne know the contracts for khan v peterson rematch? split etc

Which is fair when there's an option - but there really isn't for the brothers.

Other than each other - there isn't anyone else - and more than anyone else - both men individually (which is nice, because I hated the tag teaming) have delivered or at least tried to deliver the best fights available.

Vitali has just come off Solis and Adamek before Chisora. Wlad is struggling a bit with Haye, Peter and now Mormeck - but each time he's been trying for Povetkin.

Give them a break for all else but each other - no?

Wladimir could if he wanted pull rank with the WBA and enforce his mandatory rights for a fight for Povetkin but has yet to do it, the reasons behind that I have no idea.

There are too many little inconsequential things that combined become quite a big thing.

He already has once before remember? Povetkin pulled out with an ankle injury (that may well have been genuine) - and then when Wlad asked to re-arrange - we heard the 2 years BS from Povetkin, newly with Team Atlas

As the WBAs super champion he can force Povetkin to face him or lose his title but it also works in reverse I believe, seems to me that they aren't willing to call eachothers bluff, more an issue with the WBA than the fighters themselves.

He has before was meant to be my point Ghosty, I'd be surprised if he didn't again.

If he had Povektin wouldn't be the regular WBA champion, for whatever reason I don't think either party wants the fights.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:If he had Povektin wouldn't be the regular WBA champion, for whatever reason I don't think either party wants the fights.

We'll see. Rest assured that if Povetkin doesn't fight Wlad - I will hold it against probably both guys careers - although the balance with Povetkin. He should be the one chasing the belt, after all.

Why chase it when you already have it?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Why chase it when you already have it?

He doesn't really, come on. Does anyone actually believe that regular champ nonsense?

I suppose so. Many many people bought into the idea that Audley was going to present a serious challenge.

Hell - even I thought he'd throw a punch.