Golden Boy Promotions: The Blatant Push for a PPV Star

First topic message reminder :

By announcing the Ortiz vs Canelo fight before business had been taken care of in the ring exposed several things about GBP.

Firstly, they were naive, and arrogant to think that a fighter who has mental issues in the ring, and had had 9 months out of it prior to the fight, would walk through a very game and live opponent. Although Ortiz was a clear favorite to win this was very silly, IMO.

Also, the way they have been so public about Canelo's next fight in the hope that it adds to the promotional hype, is only diluting the event. I admit that this is not solely their fault. Tragedy and injuries have played a part, but GBP are using their flagship fighter's name so much, it's like they are at dinner trying impress a fickle girl. It feels blatant, and well, amateurish, if honest.

You can go back a little further and look at the first B-Hop vs Dawson fight. If GBP couldn't realize that B-Hop wouldn't sell as much on the west coast than the east after years of watching/ promoting him, then what the hell do they think all this posturing for a fight they haven't secured is going to achieve? When they make these mistakes it just seems so glaring.

The stubborn factor is also becoming a problem, and will only, in my mind, make the Chavez Jr vs Sergio Martinez fight more of a sure thing to happen. As much as it pains me to admit, Bob Arum has won the date and the day. He is not going to back down and if GBP go ahead and fight on that date then they will be the financial losers, i think.

Chavez vs Martinez has been bubbling for a long time, and fans these days must pine for a sure thing, surely? In boxing terms, looking at both fights, it is the Top Rank promotion that has the more certainty, and therefore the better chance of being a huge hit. If GBP do go ahead, then they will need a stacked under card and a genuine live opponent. Cotto might swings things in their favor, but that match-up seems unlikely. The rest of the fights out there are good on paper: Lara, Trout etc, but these aren't big enough names to warrant the PPV or rivalry with Top Rank, IMO.

For me the recent problems started with the Khan vs Peterson loss. Although Lamont was later found to be cheating, allowing Amir to say he told us so, the way GBP and their fighter moaned post-fight was not good. It was sour grapes, and only the PED issue saved them some face. It was so obvious this was a PPV issue for them, their next star had been beaten!

Berto vs Ortiz resulted in another PED issue, and again this is not GBP fault. Although you could say that their company should take testing more seriously, but still, Berto was found to be cheating. This meant the date was ruined, and a late replacement needed. And we all saw what happened there.

I don't know, GBP seem to be losing their touch for making exciting fights, and are blatantly pushing for their next PPV star. I wont watch the Canelo fight live unless the opponent is live. Let's just hope that they move the date, take some time, and come up with a legitimate challenge and a legitimate promotion. Alluding to network television and making comments about "very exciting possibilities" is not helping them.

Reach us when you know something, GBP.

azania wrote:So basically all boxers who don't continue after being injured fail their gut checks. Including those who take a knee after sustaining a beating.

That was what you wrote in relation to the Vitali/Byrd fight. I just subbed in Ortiz name instead of Vitali.

Circumstance dictates definition, a knife to the gut of a man trying to kill you and a knife to the gut of someone who isnt - both have killed a man - the first had very little choice the second was a murder. The cold hard fact of it is that both of them did quit, but Ortiz Folded in a tough fight where he didnt want to know against a half decent guy who he should have beaten handily and Vitali withdrew from a fight he was easily winning to prolong his career. They did quit but one deserves the criticism whilst the other deserves sympathy as he was hamstrung near the finish line - rather than going through the motions in the last 50 metres

Seems Azania has confirmed what he thinks...

All boxers have heart. Did A-Force have heart against Haye? He failed many checks in that fight? Was he a quitter?

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:So basically all boxers who don't continue after being injured fail their gut checks. Including those who take a knee after sustaining a beating.

That was what you wrote in relation to the Vitali/Byrd fight. I just subbed in Ortiz name instead of Vitali.

Fair enough. I supposed the context was missing. Ortiz had multiple fractures in his jaw. Ali and Abrahams have both continued with busted jaws but it wasn't as damaged as Ortiz's jaw. Had they stopped, I wouldn't have held it against them either. My response to Vitali was in response to another boxer being called a quitter.

ShahenshahG wrote:Circumstance dictates definition, a knife to the gut of a man trying to kill you and a knife to the gut of someone who isnt - both have killed a man - the first had very little choice the second was a murder. The cold hard fact of it is that both of them did quit, but Ortiz Folded in a tough fight where he didnt want to know against a half decent guy who he should have beaten handily and Vitali withdrew from a fight he was easily winning to prolong his career. They did quit but one deserves the criticism whilst the other deserves sympathy as he was hamstrung near the finish line - rather than going through the motions in the last 50 metres

So Vitali withdrew and Ortiz quit. Had Audley 'withdrawn' against Sprott would you have been so generous and forgiving? Danny Williams continued with his arm hanging on. Why couldn't Vitali? Why give him a pass?

By the way, Ortiz was also winning. Vitali was also winning easily and seeing as other boxers have continued with far worse injuries to their arm, why not level the same criticism to Vitali?

Either both are quitters or none.

davidemore wrote:Seems Azania has confirmed what he thinks...

All boxers have heart. Did A-Force have heart against Haye? He failed many checks in that fight? Was he a quitter?

He got knocked out. How on earth is he a quitter? He can be criticised for not being a very good boxer but not a coward.

The context was surrounding whether or not Vitali quit and could or should have continued in his fight with Byrd.

I would view the two scenarios as comparable. If anything, Ortiz was slightly more favourable because as bad a his jaw may have been I still think having two good arms to fight with leaves you in a better spot than Vitali with one arm badly busted.

However you maintained that Vitali quit and could and should have fought on citing others that have done it in the past and the fact that all he had to do was remain upright to win.

I dont really see how one could argue that Vitali could and should have fought on and then come to the defence of Ortiz for not doing the same.

I would also throw in that Ortiz has a history of taking the quick way out and had more to lose in this instance with a ppv fight with Alvarez already set up.

http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/8094931/victor-ortiz-jaw-surgery-eyes-josesito-lopez-rematch for everyone criticizing Ortiz, read that and honestly tell me you can blame him for quitting.

manos de piedra wrote:The context was surrounding whether or not Vitali quit and could or should have continued in his fight with Byrd.

I would view the two scenarios as comparable. If anything, Ortiz was slightly more favourable because as bad a his jaw may have been I still think having two good arms to fight with leaves you in a better spot than Vitali with one arm badly busted.

However you maintained that Vitali quit and could and should have fought on citing others that have done it in the past and the fact that all he had to do was remain upright to win.

I dont really see how one could argue that Vitali could and should have fought on and then come to the defence of Ortiz for not doing the same.

I would also throw in that Ortiz has a history of taking the quick way out and had more to lose in this instance with a ppv fight with Alvarez already set up.

Comparing the two scenarios, I would say that Ortiz suffered the worse injury. Byrd is a small HW with little power. Hell Vitali fighting with one arm tied behind his back would have beaten him anyway. But for someone to call Ortiz a quitter and give Vit a pass is being disingenuous.

Context is a big part of that Az, Ortiz has previous for quitting whereas Vitali hasn't.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The context was surrounding whether or not Vitali quit and could or should have continued in his fight with Byrd.

I would view the two scenarios as comparable. If anything, Ortiz was slightly more favourable because as bad a his jaw may have been I still think having two good arms to fight with leaves you in a better spot than Vitali with one arm badly busted.

However you maintained that Vitali quit and could and should have fought on citing others that have done it in the past and the fact that all he had to do was remain upright to win.

I dont really see how one could argue that Vitali could and should have fought on and then come to the defence of Ortiz for not doing the same.

I would also throw in that Ortiz has a history of taking the quick way out and had more to lose in this instance with a ppv fight with Alvarez already set up.

Comparing the two scenarios, I would say that Ortiz suffered the worse injury. Byrd is a small HW with little power. Hell Vitali fighting with one arm tied behind his back would have beaten him anyway. But for someone to call Ortiz a quitter and give Vit a pass is being disingenuous.

But you appear to have done the opposite. You gave Ortiz a pass, but not Vitali. This is why I brought it up. Im not too concerned with which injury is worse to be honest. I imagine both were extremelly painful and debilitating. Saying Byrd doesnt power etc (Lopez is barely a welter by the way) is kind of missing the point.

You maintained Vitali could and should have fought on against Byrd when I put it to you on another thread some time ago. And that by not doing so he quit and failed a gut check.

Yet you have come to Ortiz defence for a similar scenario.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Context is a big part of that Az, Ortiz has previous for quitting whereas Vitali hasn't.

I agree. He did quit against Maidana. But this is an entirely different situation altogether.

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The context was surrounding whether or not Vitali quit and could or should have continued in his fight with Byrd.

I would view the two scenarios as comparable. If anything, Ortiz was slightly more favourable because as bad a his jaw may have been I still think having two good arms to fight with leaves you in a better spot than Vitali with one arm badly busted.

However you maintained that Vitali quit and could and should have fought on citing others that have done it in the past and the fact that all he had to do was remain upright to win.

I dont really see how one could argue that Vitali could and should have fought on and then come to the defence of Ortiz for not doing the same.

I would also throw in that Ortiz has a history of taking the quick way out and had more to lose in this instance with a ppv fight with Alvarez already set up.

Comparing the two scenarios, I would say that Ortiz suffered the worse injury. Byrd is a small HW with little power. Hell Vitali fighting with one arm tied behind his back would have beaten him anyway. But for someone to call Ortiz a quitter and give Vit a pass is being disingenuous.

But you appear to have done the opposite. You gave Ortiz a pass, but not Vitali. This is why I brought it up. Im not too concerned with which injury is worse to be honest. I imagine both were extremelly painful and debilitating. Saying Byrd doesnt power etc (Lopez is barely a welter by the way) is kind of missing the point.

You maintained Vitali could and should have fought on against Byrd when I put it to you on another thread some time ago. And that by not doing so he quit and failed a gut check.

Yet you have come to Ortiz defence for a similar scenario.

You have to take each situation independently and take into consideration the injuries involved. In terms of being able to continue, Vitali stood a fairer chance. He decided to err on the side of caution.

DaveVDK wrote:http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/8094931/victor-ortiz-jaw-surgery-eyes-josesito-lopez-rematch for everyone criticizing Ortiz, read that and honestly tell me you can blame him for quitting.

To be honest Dave, I think most people's issue is less with whether or not Ortiz quit, and more with Azania's hypocrisy.

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Context is a big part of that Az, Ortiz has previous for quitting whereas Vitali hasn't.

I agree. He did quit against Maidana. But this is an entirely different situation altogether.

Not at all, this situation is defined by him quitting against Maidana, without that this fight becomes less of an issue.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The context was surrounding whether or not Vitali quit and could or should have continued in his fight with Byrd.

I would view the two scenarios as comparable. If anything, Ortiz was slightly more favourable because as bad a his jaw may have been I still think having two good arms to fight with leaves you in a better spot than Vitali with one arm badly busted.

However you maintained that Vitali quit and could and should have fought on citing others that have done it in the past and the fact that all he had to do was remain upright to win.

I dont really see how one could argue that Vitali could and should have fought on and then come to the defence of Ortiz for not doing the same.

I would also throw in that Ortiz has a history of taking the quick way out and had more to lose in this instance with a ppv fight with Alvarez already set up.

Comparing the two scenarios, I would say that Ortiz suffered the worse injury. Byrd is a small HW with little power. Hell Vitali fighting with one arm tied behind his back would have beaten him anyway. But for someone to call Ortiz a quitter and give Vit a pass is being disingenuous.

But you appear to have done the opposite. You gave Ortiz a pass, but not Vitali. This is why I brought it up. Im not too concerned with which injury is worse to be honest. I imagine both were extremelly painful and debilitating. Saying Byrd doesnt power etc (Lopez is barely a welter by the way) is kind of missing the point.

You maintained Vitali could and should have fought on against Byrd when I put it to you on another thread some time ago. And that by not doing so he quit and failed a gut check.

Yet you have come to Ortiz defence for a similar scenario.

You have to take each situation independently and take into consideration the injuries involved. In terms of being able to continue, Vitali stood a fairer chance. He decided to err on the side of caution.

It seems that viewing the incidents seprately is really just viewing from the perspective of being a fan of Ortiz and not one of Vitali. I cant really think of any other reason that one could have polar opposite stances to very similar scenarios.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Context is a big part of that Az, Ortiz has previous for quitting whereas Vitali hasn't.

I agree. He did quit against Maidana. But this is an entirely different situation altogether.

Not at all, this situation is defined by him quitting against Maidana, without that this fight becomes less of an issue.

Perhaps, but some guys get a pass and others appear not to. Is Cotto taking a knee held against and would it be used if he busted up his jaw and decided not to continue? I doubt it. Ditto Vitali. Its not just that Ortiz quit, but his apparent nonchalance during the interview and his happy smiley face post Floyd.

I have to be honest that I am not a fan of Vitali (as a person and not a boxer). I have argued his case in his Lewis fight. I'm no big fan of Ortiz but enjoy his fights, no in that case I have no particular axe to grind or need to big up anyone. The situation may be similar but not too similar. Many boxers have continued with damaged arms/hands. Didn't Gatti continue against Ward in their 3rd fight? Audley, Floyd, Williams and many more. Injuring your arm is an occupational hazard more so that a triple fracture of your jaw.

I wont hold it against Vitali for quitting, because quitting is what he did. He was being prudent.

Cotto didn't have previous, I would say out of the three he had the most reason to quit, he was beaten mercilessly for round after round and in the end something had to give, by the same token Vitali didn't have previous. In Ortiz you have a fighter who now has three seperate instances of taking the easy way out.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Cotto didn't have previous, I would say out of the three he had the most reason to quit, he was beaten mercilessly for round after round and in the end something had to give, by the same token Vitali didn't have previous. In Ortiz you have a fighter who now has three seperate instances of taking the easy way out.

Prior to Maidana Ortiz didn't have previous either. But that label stuck. 3 instances? What are the other 2? Please don't say Peterson.

Cotto has it now. If he quits in future for a serious injury it wouldn;t be held against him. It shouldn't either.

It's the manner in which he quit, there was nothing seriously wrong he decided he'd had enough and gave up. Maidana, Lopez and to an extent Mayweather.

Actually I think Vitalis injury was more serious and debilitating in boxing terms. Busted shoulders have far greater repurcussions and can literally end careers.

As bad as Ortiz jaw may have been the long term consequences are not as serious in boxing terms.

I also think being one armed in a fight is worse than having a broken jaw in terms of how defenceless you are.

Both are bad injuries, I just dont get how one scenario can be viewed so differently to the other unless its just personal preferance for the boxers involved.

manos de piedra wrote:Actually I think Vitalis injury was more serious and debilitating in boxing terms. Busted shoulders have far greater repurcussions and can literally end careers.

As bad as Ortiz jaw may have been the long term consequences are not as serious in boxing terms.

I also think being one armed in a fight is worse than having a broken jaw in terms of how defenceless you are.

Both are bad injuries, I just dont get how one scenario can be viewed so differently to the other unless its just personal preferance for the boxers involved.

Beig one armed didn't stop those I mentioned above. They continued and won. Especially bad for Floyd who was not a concussive puncher. And of course Audley. William's injury was far worse than what affected Vitali. He made a prudent decision.

Yes and boxers have fought on and won with broken jaws in the past.

And if your going to say "Ortiz was worse" or something along those lines then you might consider that not all injured shoulders are identical either and come in various levels of seriousness.

You dont know the level or effect of Vitalis shoulder injury, the pain he may have been in, or the potential consequences of continuing so theres not much point on speculating. Some fighters have torn their shoulder and never had the same kind of power in that arm again.

Its not even the arbitary splitting of hairs that was my intention. It was the fact you had adopted complete opposite stances over similar scenarios. It gives off the impression of simply adopting a stance due to your personal preferance for the fighters involved.

manos de piedra wrote:Yes and boxers have fought on and won with broken jaws in the past.

And if your going to say "Ortiz was worse" or something along those lines then you might consider that not all injured shoulders are identical either and come in various levels of seriousness.

You dont know the level or effect of Vitalis shoulder injury, the pain he may have been in, or the potential consequences of continuing so theres not much point on speculating. Some fighters have torn their shoulder and never had the same kind of power in that arm again.

Its not even the arbitary splitting of hairs that was my intention. It was the fact you had adopted complete opposite stances over similar scenarios. It gives off the impression of simply adopting a stance due to your personal preferance for the fighters involved.

So both fighters took a prudent way out.

Im not passing judgement on either fighter, well not quite because I think Ortiz reaction to the fights he hasnt finished has bugged me. I just see the individual scenarios as being comparable.

Both fighters could have carried on but the consequences could have been very serious.

I've said on here that I dont like Ortiz's reaction everytime he loses. The manana approach. It sucks to me. But this situation is different from anything that went before and shouldn't be held against him which some are trying to do.

azania wrote:I've said on here that I dont like Ortiz's reaction everytime he loses. The manana approach. It sucks to me. But this situation is different from anything that went before and shouldn't be held against him which some are trying to do.

I would agree with that. I think he probably could have continued. Some other boxers would have, some others wouldnt. But given the nature of injury I dont think he was obliged to continue in that spot neccessarily regardless of the fact that some others might have.

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:I've said on here that I dont like Ortiz's reaction everytime he loses. The manana approach. It sucks to me. But this situation is different from anything that went before and shouldn't be held against him which some are trying to do.

I would agree with that. I think he probably could have continued. Some other boxers would have, some others wouldnt. But given the nature of injury I dont think he was obliged to continue in that spot neccessarily regardless of the fact that some others might have.

The same applies to Vitali. Other boxers with worse arm injuries have decided to continue (Audkley and Williams).

Did Kessler quit agianst Ward? Did Alexander quit against Bradley?

Bradley twisted one ankle and broke the other against Pac and still stood tall...

davidemore wrote:Did Kessler quit agianst Ward? Did Alexander quit against Bradley?

Bradley twisted one ankle and broke the other against Pac and still stood tall...

Your point being what? As for Bradley breaking a leg, pull the other one. If you break your ankly walking would be somewhat difficult regardless of the adrenelin. Nice touch that he entered the post fight pressers on a wheelchair. The American markey were in floods of tears in admiration of his bravery. Orpah called him for an interview also. All gushing and sentimental.

azania wrote:

davidemore wrote:Did Kessler quit agianst Ward? Did Alexander quit against Bradley?

Bradley twisted one ankle and broke the other against Pac and still stood tall...

Your point being what? As for Bradley breaking a leg, pull the other one. If you break your ankly walking would be somewhat difficult regardless of the adrenelin. Nice touch that he entered the post fight pressers on a wheelchair. The American markey were in floods of tears in admiration of his bravery. Orpah called him for an interview also. All gushing and sentimental.

Have they shown any x-rays of that? Seemed like absolute baloney to me. I've damaged my ankle a number of times playing rugby and even a severe sprain is tough to walk on, no way could I have pulled off the range and extent of movement Bradley did in that fight.

@ Azania.

My point regarding Kessler and Alexander is how do we define a quitter? Those two weren't pounded as much as Ortiz yet all three technically, could be called both quitters and warriors. It's tough to define.

davidemore wrote:@ Azania.

My point regarding Kessler and Alexander is how do we define a quitter? Those two weren't pounded as much as Ortiz yet all three technically, could be called both quitters and warriors. It's tough to define.

They were being butter to oblivion. I wouldn't call that quitting. And Ortiz suffered mulltiple fractures on his jaw for heaven's sake.

Azania i am trying to define a quitter, who is a quitter? and i am talking about modern times.

Can we even call a fighter a quitter? I mean i have in the past but is it logical? Alexander got butted not beaten, as did Kessler. Although Kessler took some licks.

Its hard to say although a couple of Tyson's victime seem to go down and stay there without a punch landing. Bruce Seldon seems to be one. I think he got knocked out by the breeze.

KO'd by fear, that's a powerful boxer.

Pac Man had the ability to do that until recently.

Clottey quit as soon as he got in the ring with Pac. I mean he may as well of, his defense was tighter than a nun's... you know the saying, no need to get crude.