Connect with us

Articles of 2002




Well, as we predicted, John Ruiz lost to Don King the other day in U.S. District Court in New York. That was really the only plausible result, given the laws of contracts as well as the circumstances. Yeah, I know Ruiz' people were hoping to get the judge who is supposed to hear Mike Tyson's lawsuit against Don King – if I were them, I'd want that too. I'd certainly do my best to trade in on King's notorious reputation, especially if I didn't have case law on my side.

But ultimately this decision is one that should indeed be dictated by the facts, rather than personalities. And I think it's best that this particular judge – Laura Taylor Swain – has not handled boxing cases before, because she'd be less likely to have a pre-conceived notion about either the plaintiff or the defendant. After all, this case has the potential to affect the way all promoters deal with all fighters. Her ruling against Ruiz' petition for a temporary restraining order (preventing King from interfering with the negotiations for a Ruiz-Tyson fight) was correct, even if she refused to admit Chapter 51 of “Operation Cleanup” into evidence, as King's lawyer, Peter Fleming, attempted to do 🙂

I would imagine that none of what King is alleged to have done vis-a-vis Tyson really matters, because King is not breaking with any of his obligations as per the promotional agreement with Ruiz.

Remember, as we pointed out in the last chapter, there is nothing in the King-Ruiz agreement that requires King to maximize the earnings of Ruiz, or to make the best financial deal for Ruiz for any particular fight, whether it is Ruiz' desire to go in that direction or not.

I'll go even one further – the attempts by Ruiz and Tyson to negotiate for a fight WITHOUT the involvement of King could be interpreted as a tortious interference with King's contract on the part of Tyson's people, inasmuch as King does indeed have the exclusive right to secure and promote fights for Ruiz.

Ruiz is probably a better fighter than many people give him credit for, but with all due respect, his camp can posture all they'd like about King being the “big bad wolf” here; I have a feeling all King would have to do is show the judge a tape of Ruiz' 19-second knockout loss to David Tua, then explain that he subsequently was able to steer that very same fighter to a mandatory #1 ranking, without having to beat a truly legitimate contender, and to a heavyweight championship that he has managed to hold on to for 18 months – through a draw and a disqualification – and this judge might just be ready to give King the James J. Walker Award, right then and there.

But I promised you folks there was going to be another side to this coin, and basically, here it is —

In Section C-2 of Professional Boxer Safety Act, this is the way a “manager” is defined:

“(10) MANAGER- The term `manager' means a person who, under contract, agreement, or other arrangement with a boxer, undertakes to control or administer, directly or indirectly, a boxing-related matter on behalf of that boxer, including a person who is a booking agent for a boxer.”

This is the way a “promoter” is defined:

“(14) PROMOTER- The term `promoter' means the person primarily responsible for organizing, promoting, and producing a professional boxing match. The term `promoter' does not include a hotel, casino, resort, or other commercial establishment hosting or sponsoring a professional boxing match unless–

`(A) the hotel, casino, resort, or other commercial establishment is primarily responsible for organizing, promoting, and producing the match; and

`(B) there is no other person primarily responsible for organizing, promoting, and producing the match.”

Yes, a promoter provides for and arranges for a fight card to take place. The promoter also signs fighters to promotional contracts, and that doesn't represent a fundamental departure from his basic function – promoting fights – since one would assume the fighters under contract would be appearing on those cards.

A manager is unquestionably an advocate for the fighter – he is, theoretically, in the kind of “adversarial” position that is generally considered to be healthy for the process – negotiating the best purse, for the best terms, with the promoter, on behalf of his fighter.

That's theory, and indeed, it sometimes constitutes practice. However, in some instances reality is quite different. That's because a lot of things in this business have changed. The nature of boxing is such that it has become very improbable that a fighter can advance his career without committing himself to a promotional contract. And once the promotional contract is signed, the manager more or less relinquishes any control he may have over his fighter's career, whether it is voluntary or not. In most cases, the manager is completely entrusting the career of his fighter to the promoter, who has the staff, the financial resources, the contacts, and presumably the expertise, to make that career successful.

The promoter will make the decisions as to when, where, against whom, and for how much a fighter will perform. The managerial function often becomes reduced to that of a “care-taker”. With very few exceptions, the days where the power resided in the hands of the manager are long gone.

And we haven't even talked about those so-called managers who are “close associates” or operatives of promoters, are therefore a benign entity.

With this reduced authority on the part of managers, the promoter has taken on more and more of a proprietary interest in a fighter's career, assuming much more of a managerial function, in substance if not in name, or in law.

Because promoters do indeed sign fighters to contracts, and invest money in careers, it can be argued that it is in their best interests for the fighter's career to progress in a positive direction; therefore, you would assume they are working in the fighter's best interests. This certainly is not an unreasonable expectation on the part of the fighter.

But remember, the promoter is not contractually bound to act in a fighter's “best interests”. Any promoter, in fact, who includes that kind of language in a contract is probably leaving himself vulnerable.

When a fighter is offered the opportunity to earn a payday on a show that is being promoted by ANOTHER promoter, the dynamic of the promoter's role changes – in my opinion, considerably.

That is because, as the holder of the fighter's exclusive promotional rights, the promoter is in the position where he customarily has the right to be compensated in exchange for “releasing” those promotional rights for that single event.

To illustrate this, we'll take a look at how money is distributed for a fight. Let's say, for example, that HBO or Showtime is paying “Promoter A” a total of $2 million in fees for the right to televise a fight card. That money is then budgeted in certain ways – perhaps $1.4 million of that is set aside to pay the two fighters in the main event.

To simply things, let's suppose this figure is split down the middle – where $700,000 apiece is “available” for each fighter. One of the fighters is under a promotional deal with “Promoter B”, so therefore “Promoter A” has to have his written permission to use the fighter, and consequently he negotiates the purse with him. He apprises “Promoter B” as to what is available, and at that point “Promoter B”, who is empowered in the way a manager may have been in a different era of boxing, negotiates NOT for the best purse figure for the fighter, but more in terms of best deal for HIMSELF.

So what happens? He negotiates a $300,000 “side deal” for himself, then turns around and offers $400,000 to the fighter, telling him “that's what the fight is worth”. If the fighter signs for that figure (and he usually will), “Promoter B” has just pocketed a nice piece of change – a figure, in fact, equal to 75% of what the fighter is getting. That's basically how it works – and the fighter never knows a thing about it if anyone can help it, because “Promoter B” is going to afford “Promoter A” the same courtesy when the roles are reversed somewhere down the line.

It's important to note that the pie doesn't necessarily get any bigger because of a promoter's side deal – the promotional fee is not IN ADDITION to the money earmarked for the fighter; it comes OUT of it.

So in effect, not only is the promoter, who has thrust himself forward as the fighter's exclusive representative, not negotiating from the perspective of the best interests of the fighter he has under contract, he is, in effect, negotiating AGAINST him. It's not like a managerial relationship, where if the manager bargains a promoter UP from $400,000 to $600,000 his fee goes from $133,000 to $200,000 (based on 33-1/3%) – here if the fighter gets LESS, the promoter winds up with MORE.

You had better believe there's nothing “fiduciary” about that relationship, although the promoter, as the sole negotiating representative of the fighter, would seem to be positioning himself much the same as a fiduciary would.

The fighter and his camp do not have an opportunity to negotiate the best purse for themselves with the ACTUAL promoter, because by virtue of the agreement, they are PRECLUDED from such negotiations. This state of affairs was affirmed by Judge Swain's ruling.

You're going to say, “Gee, all this sounds like a conflict of interest”, and maybe it is. Of course, there may indeed be some degree of justification for this – that's a subject we can devote a whole chapter to. For this purposes of this story, though, we don't want to examine the “right and wrong” of such an arrangement; we want to establish that such arrangements DO exist, and that they change the role and function of the promoter in such specific circumstances.

It's a point, however, that has been completely lost on those who have crafted, and who have lent advice pursuant to, the Federal boxing legislation that is in place, and that which is being proposed.

Let's revisit that definition of “manager”, as it appears in the Professional Boxer Safety Act –

“(10) MANAGER- The term `manager' means a person who, under contract, agreement, or other arrangement with a boxer, undertakes to control or administer, directly or indirectly, a boxing-related matter on behalf of that boxer, including a person who is a booking agent for a boxer.”

Well, given the situation we just laid out for you, that could very well describe a promoter, couldn't it?

Now look again at the definition of a “promoter”:

“(14) PROMOTER- The term `promoter' means the person primarily responsible for organizing, promoting, and producing a professional boxing match.”

Well, as we've demonstrated, you can position yourself as a promoter, and get paid for it, without being “primarily responsible for organizing, promoting, and producing a professional boxing match”, can't you?

Finally, let's examine the definition of a “promotional agreement” from the same section of the Professional Boxer Safety Act:

“(15) PROMOTIONAL AGREEMENT- The term `promotional agreement' means a contract between a promoter and a boxer under which the boxer grants to a promoter the exclusive right to secure and arrange all professional boxing matches requiring the boxer's services for–

`(A) a prescribed period of time; or

`(B) a prescribed number of professional boxing matches.”

Whether you realize it or not, there are people possessing promotional contracts with fighters who don't put on any shows at all; they just know that it is better to have a promotional deal than it is to have a managerial deal, because (a) it offers more control over the fighter, and (b) it affords the opportunity to make more money off the fighter. If you've read this chapter, you understand this.

So shouldn't the definition of a “promoter” be modified, at the very least, to specifically include ALL parties who have promotional agreements with a fighter?

Shouldn't the definitions of manager and promoter be contemplated more carefully and perhaps rewritten?

Shouldn't a number of provisions in the Federal law be changed to more accurately reflect the way the business of boxing is actually conducted?

Sure, there's a possibility that Ruiz could win his action against King, which is scheduled to be heard on September 6. But for that to happen, Judge Swain would have to most likely (1) completely reverse the position that she took in the TRO hearing; (2) rule that there is something inherently illegal about the structure of promotional contracts in boxing; and (3) take steps toward re-defining the role of the promoter in boxing.

As far as the latter is concerned, maybe some changes are in order. But I don't think it's Judge Swain's place to do it in court; rather, it is something that would need to be done through amendments to the Federal legislation, after consultation with experts. It's not a simple thing to do.

Ideas? I've got a few. And you'll read them soon enough.

Copyright 2002 Total Action Inc.

Articles of 2002




Walk the dog, stroll through the park, have a picnic at the lake.
There are safer things for IBF cruiserweight champ Vassily Jirov to do this month than defend his title against James “Lights Out” Toney.
Barbecue, play softball, fish, visit the zoo. Thank his lucky stars.
Jirov, who lives in California, won’t be fighting Toney on HBO on Jan. 25.
Something to do with his insides.
Ask Toney why Jirov pulled out of their fight and he’ll tell you it was Jirov’s heart that let him down, his backbone that went soft, not his banged-up ribs. Ask Toney and he’ll tell you about heartbreak and lies and revenge and fighting anybody in the universe if it means another title. Jirov claims he suffered the damage while sparring. Maybe. But it’s the fourth time Jirov has found a reason not to fight Toney. How many times you got to be told to go home before you realize the guy doesn’t want to come outside and play? How many times you got to be bit by the same dog before you realize it wants to be left alone? Jirov has more excuses than a politician caught with a hooker on his lap.
In his own eloquent way, Toney recently described how disappointed he was in the cancellation of their title fight on the undercard of the Vernon Forrest – Ricardo Mayorga welterweight title fight.
“The @#%$%*&#@,’’ Toney said after learning of the postponement on Christmas Eve. “Jirov can @&%$#% and then he can @%$#@#$. He’s nothing but a #$%#@#.’’ That said, it doesn’t brighten up the New Year in the Toney household.
“I’m done with it,’’ said Toney, sounding like a guy who finally gets tried of being stood up by the same girl.
As of Dec. 30, there was still no word of an opponent for Toney, though he’s still making regular trips to the gym.
Merry Christmas, James. Have a Happy New Year.
“Bah, humbug,’’ said Toney’s promoter Dan Goossen. “We didn’t have much of a Christmas. I got the news on Christmas Eve. But you just have to bounce back.’’ Funny thing about fighters. Some make excuses, some fight through them. You get the feeling Toney could have cracked five ribs and his right tibia and still climbed into the ring against Jirov.
It raises a lot of questions. What’s Jirov got against fighting? After a busy 2001, he hasn’t fought since last February. How do you hold a title after you’ve gone into retirement? Just who is this guy and why does he like to hide? Is there really a Vassily Jirov out there, or is he a creation of the IBF, a shadowy figure who won the title and decided it was too big a risk to keep defending it? The bottom line is, Toney may be left with a lot of unexpected free time on his hands if they don’t find him another fight, though he knew better than to mark the date on his calendar in ink. There are no promises in boxing. When dealing with a guy like Jirov, all bets are off. But Toney can still hope. The name O’Neil Bell – the WBC’s No. 1 challenger – has been knocked around, and Toney said he doesn’t care what contender or champion he knocks out on Jan. 25. “#@#$%$#,’’ Toney said.
You can say that again.

Continue Reading

Articles of 2002

New Year's Resolutions



A new year is upon us, which means it's time for new years resolutions. Yeah, never mind that most resolutions are broken, oh, around the third week of January; everybody still makes them.

Here are my resolutions that I'd make for some of the luminaries in the sport of boxing.

* Floyd Mayweather: No more excuses. Anyone else sick of listening to 'the Pretty Boy' whine about what ailments he came into the fight with? Whether it's his fragile hands, a bum shoulder or his squabbles with his promoter Bob Arum, he always has an alibi. Hey Floyd, nobody cares, you get paid plenty to perform and those that buy tickets don't care that you might have a hangnail; they want nothing but the best effort out of you.

Mayweather reminds me of former Los Angeles Dodger slugger Mike Marshall, who's second home seemed to be the disabled list. The bottom line is this guy is lucky to be a boxer where he only has to perform once every 6 months- he simply couldn't handle the rigors of an NBA, NFL or baseball season. Ask any athlete if they are ever 100-percent healthy after the first day of training camp or spring training and they'll laugh at you.

Injuries and ailments are a part of the job, overcoming them is what makes a true professional. Mayweather still hasn't grasped that concept.

* Jim Gray: Respect. I guess this little weasel is whom Aretha Franklin was talking about in her song. Think about it, have you ever seen a guy be so disrespectful to fighters in post-fight interviews like this guy. Don't even mention HBO's Larry Merchant- he isn't afraid to ask the tough questions like a true journalist and he's consistent. Gray looks at boxing as a secondary gig and looks down on boxers in general.

Don't believe me? Just compare and contrast his softball interviews that he does for NBC and the hatchet jobs he does on Showtime.

* Max Kellerman: No more over-hyping New York boxers. Look, I get along and respect Max, but when you look up the term 'East Coast Bias' in Webster's, his picture may be used as the definition of it. From Zab Judah to James Butler and to Tokumbo Olajide, he'll have you enshrined in Canastota if you come out of the Big Apple.

What's worse are the excuses he'll come up with for his New Yorkers when they fall on their faces. Max is great for boxing but he's gotta realize New York hasn't been a player on the boxing scene for at least 20 years.

* Crocodile: A new catchphrase. You know Crocodile, right? He was Mike Tyson's hype-man for all these years…the guy with the menacing shades and the army fatigues who used to scream, “GUERILLA WARFARE” at the top of his lungs over and over again.

I've heard that enough and it's about as played out as 'Whoop, there it is' and it's time he came up with a new one. All the great ones can add to their repertoire.

* HBO: Admit they acknowledge the titles. Stop being the Hypocritical Boxing Organization and just stop saying that you don't recognize these organizations. The latest example of their double-talk? Well, for years they dogged John Ruiz and his WBA title, suddenly Roy Jones challenges Ruiz and HBO is hyping this up as some sort of historic challenge of a light heavyweight trying to capture a heavyweight title.
Yeah, the same title they had basically trashed for years.

* Joe Cortez: No more over-officiating. His line is that,' He's firm but he's fair'. I'd argue about that the last couple of years but my biggest gripe with him is that he seems to make himself waaaaay too visible during fights and gets too involved. Nobody is there to watch him and he should just let the fighters fight.
Too often I see these fights with Cortez lose their flow as Cortez continually interrupts the action with his admonishments and warnings. Joe, take a step back and let us watch what we came to see.

* Don Turner: Stop living off of Holyfield-Tyson I- If you ever talk to this guy, he'll talk as though he invented boxing. And his big coup was co-training Evander Holyfield against Mike Tyson. 'The Real Deal' upset Tyson and suddenly Turner was being hailed as the new Chappie Blackburn and he became a media darling.

My question is this, did he suddenly teach Holyfield how to fight 35 fights into his career? Also, I contend that my mother and I could work Holyfield's corner and he would whip Tyson everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. And ask yourself this, when was the last time he was in the winning corner for a big fight?

* Newspaper writers: Start crediting the Internet. Ok, this is a sore subject with me, but too many times I've seen stories from the major newspaper scribes who amazingly have stories that are eerily similar to stories that I've read on the internet (or that I've written myself) and use quotes that I got in one-on-one interviews and they don't attribute their sources- the internet.

When I take quotes or info from a story I make a point to give credit where it's due. Now, I just wish these guys would do the same.

* Roy Jones: no more hip-hop entrances. Roy, you're a magnificently gifted prizefighter, you can also play just a bit of hoops, but your rhyming skills are that of Shaquille O'Neal. In other words, you're doing street nursery rhymes not Nas.

Please, oh please, stop embarrassing yourself and the sport with your cheesy as nacho's attempt to become a hip-hop performer. His last entrance/performance reminded me of one of those really bad Sir-Mix-Alot videos of the early 90's.

* Panama Lewis: an exit out of the game. You remember Lewis right, the guy who gave Aaron Pryor the mysterious white bottle before the 14th round of his bout against Alexis Arguello, which seemed to give 'the Hawk' a sudden burst of energy that enabled Pryor to brutally KO Arguello. Afterwards, Pryor would skip out on his post-fight drug test.

Then there was the fight with Luis Resto, where he would tamper with his gloves between rounds, and bearing the brunt of this tomfoolery was Billy Collins who's faced was turned into a bloody mess. Collins, in the aftermath of this brutality committed suicide. For this, Lewis was banned permanently from working a corner. But that doesn't mean that he can't go into the gym and train fighters and even attend fights.

The bottom line is simple, this man has no place in the game of boxing and boxing shouldn't tolerate him in any way.

* Cedric Kushner: no more gimmicks. This guy has tried everything from the disastrous 'ThunderBox' to one-day $100,000 heavyweight tournaments- and all have failed miserably.

He can put on a boxing version of 'Survivor' or 'Real World' if he wants but the reality is, boxing fans want good fights and interesting fighters, nothing more, nothing less.

Stop with the shenanigans and stop with the junk.

Continue Reading

Articles of 2002

Dream Fights of 2003



Hey, we can all dream, right? Isn't it our God-given right as boxing fans to think about fights that should happen – but often times don't?

And not just fights that have the highest profile or the biggest names – because sometimes those fights, like Lewis vs. Tyson – are nothing more than high-profile mismatches. I'm talking about fights that are evenly matched between the game's best and are the most intriguing inside the ring.

Here are some fights I'd pay to see in the upcoming year; full well knowing that most of these fights are pipe dreams as the business end of the sport would bog these fights down quickly. But hey, we can dream right?

* Juan Manuel Marquez vs. Erik Morales or Marco Antonio Barrera: Name me another fighter that has never won a world title belt that is better than Marquez? You can't and this guys been ducked and dodged long enough. On February 1st he takes on Manuel Medina for the vacant IBF featherweight title and it says here that he should face one of the game's best known 126-pounders, either Morales or Barrera. Marquez is a master boxer with great counter-punching skills and his hand-speed would give either one of his Mexican compatriots fits. There are some in the industry who have been saying for a while that Marquez is already the game's premiere featherweight; I'm not inclined to disagree that strongly.

CHANCES OF HAPPENING?: With Barrera, not good, as Ricardo Maldonado sees no real upside in this match-up and would most likely take an easier fight on HBO for about the same amount of money he could make facing Marquez.

With Morales, the logistics are much less complicated. Both of them are promoted by Bob Arum and there is some talk that they could face each other in May if a Morales-Barrera III isn't made.

* Bernard Hopkins vs. Roy Jones: Not only because it's a match-up of two of the very premiere fighters in the world, but Hopkins needs to resume his career with some meaningful fights and Jones should be fighting guys like 'the Executioner' instead of participating in novelty acts like his proposed bout with John Ruiz.

And don't think for one minute that this would be a blowout. Jones couldn't blowout a green Hopkins in 1993 and won't be able to do it now. Hopkins, unlike most of Jones' opponents, isn't in total awe of Pensacola's finest.

CHANCES OF HAPPENING?: Not good, Sharon and Arafat will find a common ground regarding the Middle East before these two proud and stubborn men find one in contract negotiations.

* Oscar De La Hoya vs. Vernon Forrest: For fans of pure boxing and strategy this is a fight that can't be missed. Both men have strong jabs and match-up well physically. 'The Golden Boy' has the better left hook and 'The Viper' has a more effective right hand. Between these two well-schooled boxers you can expect a tense and tight boxing match with subtle momentum swings round by round.

CHANCES OF HAPPENING?: For 2003, not very good because it looks like Oscar will be fighting once in the upcoming year – a September rematch against Shane Mosley – and Bob Arum has stated that Forrest simply brings nothing to the table promotionally. This can be interpreted as another way of saying that he's not Latin, too dangerous or just another black fighter who can't sell a ticket. The bottom line seems to be that unless Forrest raises his profile in the upcoming years, De La Hoya will be facing guys that make economic sense.

* Floyd Mayweather vs. Kostya Tszyu: This would be a face off of the sport's premier lightweight against the game's best jr. welterweight. 'The Pretty Boy' would bring speed, quickness and boxing ability to the dance. While Tszyu would bring a decided edge in strength, size and punching power. They say styles make fights and you have two contrasting ones here.

CHANCES OF HAPPENING?: Not likely. This is for a couple of reasons. First, Vlad Wharton who promotes Tszyu, is seemingly deathly afraid to take any risks with Tszyu, who's basically his cash cow. Secondly, Mayweather got a reality check from his two bouts with Jose Luis Castillo, who at 135 pounds was able to muscle him throughout their 24 rounds they fought in 2002. And Tszyu is faster, sharper and just as strong as Castillo. I'm not sure Mayweather is in any rush to make the move up to 140-pounds.

* Lennox Lewis vs. Wladimir Klitschko: The industry is always better off when there is action in the heavyweight division. So why even mess around by having Lewis take on 'the other' Klitschko or knock out Tyson again; getting right in there with the man most pundits are claiming is the heir to his throne in Wlad Klitschko?

The time is now, Lewis is getting up there in age and really doesn't have that much left in his gas tank anyway and it would be prudent for him to face Klitschko now before he gets any better. Remember, that's the tact they took in facing Michael Grant when they did – but it has to be noted that Klitschko is much better than Grant.

Lewis would have the advantages in experience and savvy, but for one of the few times in his career he would be facing a disadvantage in size and perhaps power. The two best big men on the planet squaring off, what else could you ask for?

CHANCES OF HAPPENING: Actually pretty good, since Lewis himself has stated his plans to take on both Klitschkos in between his rematch with Tyson. But with Don King now making a full court press to garner the services of Lewis, who knows what direction he goes to now.

Continue Reading