09 Apr 2018 20:53:39
Quick question people. When deals are been negotiated between mandatory title fights is the money split 50/ 50 as the fight has to happen?

1.) 09 Apr 2018
09 Apr 2018 21:47:53
the champ usually gets the bigger slice of the pie mate.

2.) 09 Apr 2018
09 Apr 2018 22:40:07
75/ 25 in favour of the challenger.

3.) 10 Apr 2018
10 Apr 2018 03:29:04
It's 75/ 25 in favour of the champion, sorry. I don't know why I put challenger.
At least, this is what Eddie Hearn was saying about it in an IFL interview a while back.

4.) 10 Apr 2018
10 Apr 2018 10:43:03
There's actually no hard and fast rule. Usually 75-25 is a starting point, but the marketability of the challenger can change that. For example, GGG against Jacobs was ordered at 75-25 in GGG's favour but in the end it was 60-40. Also GGG took US$3m -US€5m against Canelo because Canelo generate so much money. It was still a career high payday for him after the US€2,5m he got against Jacobs, but it shows you that there is no rule really.

There's no re-match clause when there's a mandatory defense, but Tyson Fury oddly agreed to one when he fought Klitschko. He didn't have to and shouldn't have done. But that was just good work by Klitschko's team who are past masters at contract negotiations.

5.) 11 Apr 2018
11 Apr 2018 16:20:49
It's 75-25 only when a fight goes to purse bid.

A fight with a mandatory can be agreed beforehand under different terms if it doesn't end up via purse bid hence Klitschko's rematch clause.

6.) 11 Apr 2018
11 Apr 2018 21:29:42
Yes you’re spot on Imred.