Haye pulls out of Bellew rematch

agree AJ is a talent, however Parker, younger, 4 more fights and has a beltalso, he's also a talent. 50/50 for this fight it has to be.

Wilder, 39 fights, has a belt... 50/50 also.

two fighters, both champions, 50/50, madness to suggest anything other....

If Parker said right then f88k you, I'll keep my belt you'll never unify it what will he do then? - no fight? - all over money, and not paying a one of two fightes (50% of the sportsment / champions) in the ring 50/50

again though, my original point was, fans are missing out because of money and what somebody may or not be worth..

50/50... ring the bell.. lets dance.. its a sport at the end of the day, fans want to see it.

comment by The Spanish Italians (U21595)
posted 17 minutes ago
agree AJ is a talent, however Parker, younger, 4 more fights and has a beltalso, he's also a talent. 50/50 for this fight it has to be.

Wilder, 39 fights, has a belt... 50/50 also.

two fighters, both champions, 50/50, madness to suggest anything other....

If Parker said right then f88k you, I'll keep my belt you'll never unify it what will he do then? - no fight? - all over money, and not paying a one of two fightes (50% of the sportsment / champions) in the ring 50/50
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If you think this is a 50-50 fight then fair enough, that's your opinion. Most would argue AJ is the talent in the fight.

If Parker decided against then he'd defend his title against mandatory challengers until beaten. But that won't happen because he'd make more money from 35% of an AJ fight than 75% (or whatever he's getting) from a Lucas Browne fight.

I'd argue fans miss out for a number of reasons. Politics is one - fighters promoted by X won't fight those promoted by Y. Fighters being protected by promoters is another - protecting the 0 defeats on the record with minimal risk fights. The split of the boxing organisations is another.

And yes, money is a reason why fans don't get all the fights they should. But it's not the only reason.

If you're waiting for the day when acclaimed fighters get paid exactly the same as that of their opponents then you'll be waiting a long, long time.

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

but there are two fighters..... like I said we (the fans) might miss out and big fights because 'Hearn thinks AJ deserves more money'

I don't doubt your points at all, what I'm saying is, its frustrating as a fan.

just like in any other sport, Huddersfield are in the premiership and have earned the right to play Man City, the premier league doesn;t pay City more because:

1)Generates more interest among fans and casual fans
2)Is guaranteed to generate higher revenue
4)Has fought the best heavyweight out there (barca)
5)Can sell out tickets in a UK market that is heavily involved in boxing, second only behind america.

Huddersfield Town play Man City tomorrow...

are you saying that Sky / premier league should pay more to City than Huddersfield?

comment by The Spanish Italians (U21595)
posted 38 minutes ago
Huddersfield Town play Man City tomorrow...

are you saying that Sky / premier league should pay more to City than Huddersfield?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

The EPL is a reward based competition. They pay out based on where people finish at the end of the season. It's not the same thing as a one off event.

The more interesting comparison is the allocation of the TV money. You may have read that the Premier League has recently rejected the even distribution of income from overseas money because Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea want more due to their popularity - they want their income to reflect their appeal and influence on the number of people that watch.

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator