Klitschkos prove their evil natures

First topic message reminder :

Vampire squids upon the face of humanity, the pair of them: http://sports.yahoo.com/box/news?slug=afp-box_ukr_oly_klitschko_medal_20120330

To stop being facetious for a moment - it does lead us onto an interesting question in terms of transcendence and dominance.

To transcend as a fighter - you have to crack America - that's what we're told and that's what history tells us. Now the K-bros are nowhere near cracking America - who really don't like either champion all that much. They'd be more disliked, but Haye gave Wlad's popularity a much needed boost last summer. Now auctions like this one and political campaigning in Europe are all very well - however - they seem to be viewed as an unhelpful sideshow, much as Manny's "Congressman" status.

Fellow 606v2ers - how do you view political activities? To be even more particular - do you believe that Wlad, Vit and Manny's activities add to, detract from or make no difference to their legacies?

By getting in politics are they providing themselves with an "excuse" for losses and poor performances? Or are they genuinely motivated to make a difference?

More like roughly 550000. But Ali would recieve 8.6 million.

working backwards, Chisora got 60 k and Vitali got 450 k in 1970

All figures are rough

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

aja424 wrote:They might not offer the amount that is usually consistant with fighting for a HW title, but surely thats because the challengers are not of the same cloth that historically HW contenders have been.

They are paying what challengers got 30 years ago in dollar terms.

A similar comparison to the 1970s would be Ali v Wepner where the split was 1.5 million for Ali and 100,000k for Wepner. Its not a vastly different split from the 2.5 million Vitali earned against the 350,000k Chisora earned.

$100k 40 years ago is probably $1m today.

No it isnt. Common sense would indicate the actual purse splits percentage wise are similar. Chisora actually got a more generous split than Wepner did.

But adjusted for inflation it would work out roughly that Vitali got 575k to Chisoras 90k by 1975 standards.

Or Ali got 6.5m to Wepners 500k by 2012 standards.

Well Wepner (a no-name) still got more than Chisora did 40 years later. The split is irrelevant.

True but Vitali, the bigesst name at heavy only got 575 k.

Suspect it would be a little easier to feel sympathy for Dereck if he then had not made the decision to give most of his purse away in fines.

azania wrote:Well Wepner (a no-name) still got more than Chisora did 40 years later. The split is irrelevant.

The split isnt irrelevant. Its all relative and by continually trying to manipulate figures to show the Klitschkos are something they are not just weakens your argument as does your casual dismissal of actual puse split being relevant as it doesnt suit your argument.

Theres very little difference between what Wepner and Chisora got actually the significant difference is that Ali got substantially more than what Vitali did.

I just Wepner specifically as he was an irrelevant scarcely deserving challenger much like Chisora is. The same way you try to use Chisoras earnings as the base rate for what Klitschkos pay despite the far more deserving challengers earning upwards of 1 million against them.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

aja424 wrote:They might not offer the amount that is usually consistant with fighting for a HW title, but surely thats because the challengers are not of the same cloth that historically HW contenders have been.

They are paying what challengers got 30 years ago in dollar terms.

A similar comparison to the 1970s would be Ali v Wepner where the split was 1.5 million for Ali and 100,000k for Wepner. Its not a vastly different split from the 2.5 million Vitali earned against the 350,000k Chisora earned.

$100k 40 years ago is probably $1m today.

100k in 1970 would be around $400,000 today - in terms of contemporary standard of living. There is a slightly higher economic power attached to 100k of 1975 - however - in terms of the actual value of the payday - its around 400k.

Which isn't a million miles from Chisora's 350k - of course - Dereck just had to slap one brother, spit at the other and then brawl with Haye - so he didn't ACTUALLY fight for 350k in the end...

rowley wrote:Suspect it would be a little easier to feel sympathy for Dereck if he then had not made the decision to give most of his purse away in fines.

Charitable donation it seems. He gave over 60% to various good causes picked by the WBC.

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:Well Wepner (a no-name) still got more than Chisora did 40 years later. The split is irrelevant.

The split isnt irrelevant. Its all relative and by continually trying to manipulate figures to show the Klitschkos are something they are not just weakens your argument as does your casual dismissal of actual puse split being relevant as it doesnt suit your argument.

Theres very little difference between what Wepner and Chisora got actually the significant difference is that Ali got substantially more than what Vitali did.

I just Wepner specifically as he was an irrelevant scarcely deserving challenger much like Chisora is. The same way you try to use Chisoras earnings as the base rate for what Klitschkos pay despite the far more deserving challengers earning upwards of 1 million against them.

Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

Just wished Haye had held out for 100% of UK PPV sales instead of being very generous and splitting it 50/50 to make the fight.

Generous.

azania wrote:Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

So Ali was a Bar Steward then because he screwed Wepner for what would be only 400k in today's terms?

Wepner wasn't coming off a loss to Tyson Fury either - he'd earned his shot with a good run of wins...

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:Well Wepner (a no-name) still got more than Chisora did 40 years later. The split is irrelevant.

The split isnt irrelevant. Its all relative and by continually trying to manipulate figures to show the Klitschkos are something they are not just weakens your argument as does your casual dismissal of actual puse split being relevant as it doesnt suit your argument.

Theres very little difference between what Wepner and Chisora got actually the significant difference is that Ali got substantially more than what Vitali did.

I just Wepner specifically as he was an irrelevant scarcely deserving challenger much like Chisora is. The same way you try to use Chisoras earnings as the base rate for what Klitschkos pay despite the far more deserving challengers earning upwards of 1 million against them.

Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

Just wished Haye had held out for 100% of UK PPV sales instead of being very generous and splitting it 50/50 to make the fight.

Well its not derisory in historical terms. The champions didnt pay much better in the 70s and earned far mor than the Klitschkos do today by comparison.

Its ridiculous to say that the Klitschkos pay the same amounts in the 70s without acknowledging they dont earn anything greater than the 1970s either. Basically they pay similar and earn less.

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

So Ali was a Bar Steward then because he screwed Wepner for what would be only 400k in today's terms?

Wepner wasn't coming off a loss to Tyson Fury either - he'd earned his shot with a good run of wins...

Nope. Taking inot account inflation etc I was told that Chuck got the equivalent of 575K.

You know as well as I do that Del should have been entering that match up as the euro champion.

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

So Ali was a Bar Steward then because he screwed Wepner for what would be only 400k in today's terms?

Wepner wasn't coming off a loss to Tyson Fury either - he'd earned his shot with a good run of wins...

Nope. Taking inot account inflation etc I was told that Chuck got the equivalent of 575K.

You know as well as I do that Del should have been entering that match up as the euro champion.

You were told wrong.

Using the measures of Contemporary Standard of Living - $100,000 in 1975 - Ali-Wepner would be worth $437000 today.

If you'd looked it up, you'd note that other measures of the equivalent values apply to Project value or Commodity value - neither of which apply to the earnings of a Professional athlete - which come firmly under the Wealth/Income index - as such, they are analysed using the formulas for the contemporary standard of living/historic standard of living.

Essentially - had that fight taken place last year - Wepner would have made 437,000.

Remind me then - is Ali a Bar Steward for paying Wepner "less than 500k?"

Still much more than Del got!

And Vit got much less than Ali got

azania wrote:Still much more than Del got!

It's 87,000 more than Del got. Which doesn't seem all that much - when, as Shah, Manos and myself, now, have told you - Ali earned much, much more than Vit.

So is Ali a Bar Steward then?

ShahenshahG wrote:And Vit got much less than Ali got

So he should.

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:Still much more than Del got!

It's 87,000 more than Del got. Which doesn't seem all that much - when, as Shah, Manos and myself, now, have told you - Ali earned much, much more than Vit.

So is Ali a Bar Steward then?

It was a mark-time defence. The K2 owed Del a fight seeing as Del was dicked around by Wlad earlier. He should have got better money than what he got (not including the fines).

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:Actually the figure is derisory. The very least a challenger should get should be 500k.

So Ali was a Bar Steward then because he screwed Wepner for what would be only 400k in today's terms?

Wepner wasn't coming off a loss to Tyson Fury either - he'd earned his shot with a good run of wins...

Nope. Taking inot account inflation etc I was told that Chuck got the equivalent of 575K.

You know as well as I do that Del should have been entering that match up as the euro champion.

Vitali got 575k by 1975 standards. Chisora got 90k by 1975 standards. So while Chisora got 10k "less" than Wepner did its kind of offset by the realisation that Vitali got almost 1 million less than what Ali did.

Just seems to be different rules for the Klitschkos to everyone else.

I get the impression no matter how much evidence I offer you to show that the amounts offered by the Klitschkos are not actually proportionally disimilar to any other past champions in their position its not going to matter. I can show you numerous occasions when Klitschkos opposition have earned in excess of 1 million for a fight, got splits ranging from 70/30 to 50/50 and so on. But I know in a few days you will be on again saying the Klitschkos are slave traders and offer challengers a pittance.

Its like using Chuck Wepners 100k as the average amount Ali offered all his opponents.

The overll package the offer is a slave contract/ No wonder Haye decided to pull out (after setenta pulled up). He signed to fight Wlad, Vit and Wlad again. That's a typical contract they offer.

To get a fight at the title, you have to sign future options away to K2 promotions. Not just that either. Its their hypocracy. They claim to respect boxing and its hostory. The history of boxing is littered with ex fighters ending up pennyless and at the mercy of the more powerful ie promoters. Their contracts are designed for themselves and not boxing. Personally I dont give a damn. But when these 2 characters claim they are interested in the legacy of boxing, its a flat out lie.

People hold them up as role models etc. For me they are no better or worse than Don King or Bob Arum. They say the right thing to the right people but in private where honesty prevails, they are no different.

As boxers I have the utmost respect for Wlad. As a person I dont.

I'll concede the issue of slave wages. They pay marginally worse than other boxers/promoters. No great shakes.

They earn far less proportionally than the champions of the 1970s did so while they pay marginally worse, they earn significantly less as mitigating factor.

Here are some of 1970s Alis lesser opponents purses: The brackets indicate adjusted to 2012 inflation.

Chuck Wepner = 100k (430k)
Coopman = 100k (400k)
Dunn = 200k (800k)
Young = 75k (305k)
Lyle = 200k (850k)
Shavers = 300k (1m)

Its pretty much in line with what the Klitschkos pay to similarly levelled opposition. The bigger difference is that Ali was an average earning about two or three times as much per fight.

To get a title fight with the Klitschkos you can select any of 5 governing bodies and become a mandatory challenger which will get you anywhere between 15-30%. Tony Thompson is next up again for Wlad and can expect to earn about 1.5 million despite losing every second of every round the last time they fought. Its not hard. People like Chisora are not owed a living simply because they are boxers. I have every sympathy for boxers that are genuinely ripped off by promoters by the idea that Chsora has been given a raw deal just doesnt wash. Getting a title shot and the 350k that went with it was a massive bonus for him rather than something he was entitled to.

I said I conceded about the pay issue. Their pay is slightly propotionally worse that Ali offered others. Propotionally worse that Tyson, Holmes, but these guys gave bigger purses.