The Boxing Scene

More on the Heavyweights

This was yet another example of how the powers that be are ruining boxing. More on the Heavyweights O ver the years, IBF heavyweight champion Wladimir Klitschko and his brother, former WBC heavyweight champion Vitali Klitschko, and have become known as good people with a social conscience. Wladimir devotes considerable time and effort to raising public awareness and funds on behalf of the United Nations Educational, Scienti fic, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). “My understanding of life changes as I see things with my own eyes,” he said recently. “The world is getting smaller. We have to act differently and change our relationships to each other.” Vitali went even further, actively campaigning as a reform candidate for election as mayor of Kiev last year. That bit of history is relevant now because Team Klitschko is currently engaged in maneuvering, that, if successful, will tarnish the Klitschko reputation forever. On September 2, 2006, Samuel Peter of Nigeria defeated James Toney in a bout that was supposed to determine the mandatory challenger for WBC heavyweight belt-holder Oleg Maskaev. But the powers that be at the WBC ruled that the decision in Peter’s favor was “controversial ” and ordered the two men to fight a rematch. They did, with Peter winning convincingly on January 6, 2007. Meanwhile, the Klitschko camp has been trying to arrange a title bout between Maskaev and one of the brothers. Initially, it wanted Peter to accept step-aside money to allow Wladimir to fight Maskaev. Samuel refused. Now Team Klitschko is urging the WBC to allow Vitali to come out of retirement and jump over Peter as the mandatory challenger by virtue of the Ukrainian being a “champion emeritus.” Asked to comment on the matter last month, WBC president José Sulaiman said, “About Vitali, because of our rules, there are now two mandatory challengers, and the WBC will have to decide which mandatory comes first. We will not take away Samuel Peter’s mandatory, but we might postpone it. If you believe that is unfair, you are mistaken.” Then, on February 8, there was a meeting in New York attended by Sulaiman , Klitschko advisor Shelly Finkel, Tom Loeffler (Klitschko’s promoter of record), Dennis Rappaport (Maskaev’s promoter), Ivaylo Gotzev (Peter’s manager), Don King, and Dino Duva (Peter’s co-promoters), DKP vice president Bob Goodman, and enough lawyers to create a feeding frenzy of monstrous proportions. The WBC, Klitschko, and Maskaev expressed the view that Klitschko–Maskaev should take place sooner rather than later. According to several meeting participants, Finkel offered $2.5 million in step-aside money to the Peter camp. In addition, if Peter stepped aside under the terms of the offer, he would be the mandatory challenger for the winner of Maskaev–Klitschko and given a fifty-fifty purse split. If the winner of Klitschko–Maskaev failed to fight Peter within 120 days, he would be stripped of his title. However, it turned out that the offer had some loopholes that made it considerably less generous than advertised. For example, when the offer was clarified, the Peter camp was told that, if Maskaev–Klitschko never happened (let’s say that Vitali is injured while training and can’t compete), Samuel would receive only $500,000. Then, negotiations were put on hold while the Klitschko camp tried to find an insurer that would back a larger number. “They’re not even telling half-truths,” grumbles one member of Team Peter . “Twenty-percent truths is more like it.” “That’s Shelly Finkel math,” says Shannon Briggs, who’s still steamed over failed negotiations for a Madison Square Garden title bout against Wladimir Klitschko last year. “Shelly [the Klitschkos’ advisor] told me I had the fight,” Briggs continues. “He said, ‘It’s not 100 percent; it’s 1,000 percent .’ I don’t know, I wasn’t that good in school. Maybe 1,000 percent is less than 100 percent.” The Peter camp is uncertain as to its next step. Samuel has earned his mandatory title shot, and his attorneys are confident that they would be awarded a significant monetary recovery if the matter were resolved in its entirety in state or federal court. Their problem is that Peter signed a contract with the WBC prior to his two “mandatory eliminator” bouts against James Toney that is believed to provide for compulsory arbitration in lieu of court action should a dispute arise. Thus, if the WBC orders that the matter be arbitrated...