EDITOR’S LETTER
The consequences of Whyte’s decision
BY the time James “Buster” Douglas had paid his expenses and left Mike Tyson scrambling around on the canvas looking for the stuffing he’d just knocked out of him, he was not quite the millionaire his $1.3m purse may have suggested. Tyson earned six times that, another few million for him to burn.
It’s 28 years, almost to the day, since Douglas marched out of his dressing room, through the Tokyo crowd that were there for a taste of his blood, past the media who had mocked his chances, and into a ring-cum-stage designed for Tyson to again showcase his murderous talent. For the 42-1 underdog, whose faith in himself knew no bounds on that famous February morning, the gamble was worth taking. Because in Douglas’ bulletproof mind, it wasn’t a gamble at all.
But if Douglas had felt his mission was worth more, if he’d opted to wait until after Tyson and Evander Holyfield had settled their differences in the hope there might be a bit more cash to make at the end of it, that would have been his choice. It’s the boxer’s choice, and only the boxer’s choice, to decide if the reward is enough to take the risk.
In the end, Douglas, who would earn mega bucks in his first defence, nailed the age-old conundrum.
Dillian Whyte’s decision to reject a £5m purse to challenge Anthony Joshua in a rematch of their 2015 clash – a £5m purse which could have risen with extras and equates to somewhere between 25 and 30 per cent – might also turn out to be exactly the right decision. He’s happy for Joshua to take on the undeserving Jarrell Miller in June instead, happy to look at other options which could include a shot at the WBC title via the Deontay Wilder-tyson Fury II winner. Presuming of course the Wilder-fury winner doesn’t have to fight the Wilder-fury loser or the Wilder-fury winner doesn’t then set his sights on Joshua or, dare we say it, Miller. Happy, also, to wait and see what happens if and when his mandatory status with the WBO – which would currently guarantee him 20 per cent of the prize fund – leads to a potential bidding war between rival promoters and a bigger slice of the pie.
For now, Whyte values himself higher than the cash that was on the table and more power to him for that. After a spell in America, talking to promoters and broadcasters, he’s decided to gamble on securing a better offer down the line. Until that time comes, if that time comes, we can’t say if he’s wrong or right. And frankly, considering we’re not the ones who will have to walk through a crowd that are baying for blood and then take the punches that will likely entice it, how much of an opinion we’re entitled to is arguable.
Whyte now looks likely to take on Dominic Breazeale on April 20 for less cash, with Joshua turning his hands to Miller, the mouthy American contender who has done little to deserve the shot at the WBA, IBF and WBO champion inside
New York’s Madison Square Garden in June. When compared to the options we’ve been teased with over the last year, it’s far from ideal.
Eddie Hearn has been blamed in some quarters for not securing Wilder, Fury or Whyte for Joshua. Wilder or Fury was always a long shot given their unfinished business, but Whyte – an easy sell and a promotional stablemate of Joshua – seemed a given. And the promoter must take some blame. Making public the April 13 Wembley Stadium booking so long ago, with promises of a barnburner to end all barnburners, set the perceived bounty so high it was always going to be hard to reach.
Hearn has never been shy about his position at the negotiating table. It’s a position which has not always served him well, particularly in last year’s Joshua-wilder talks. Indeed, his quest to take over the boxing world was bound to annoy his rivals, so too his partnership with DAZN, who have bankrolled some eye-watering deals over the last 12 months and are seemingly keen to stump up vast sums to stage Joshua-miller in the USA. With all that cash flying around, its little wonder Whyte demanded more.
Yet the Matchroom Boxing boss’ willingness to divulge all is an admirable trait in a shadowy business; you will struggle to find a bank that would doubt his business acumen or a fighter who would accuse him of being dishonest. Least of all Whyte, who under Hearn has gone from an eight-round boxer rebuilding from a drugs ban to a threetime Box Office attraction. The cynical view on that transformation is that Hearn, instrumental in the relentless rise of payper-view in the UK, only has himself to blame for the monster he himself created.
According to Whyte, the major stumbling block in the Joshua negotiations was the rematch clause. Hearn claims Whyte was eventually offered 50-50 for fight three should he defeat “AJ” in fight two. For Whyte, a man who has made impressive progress over the last 12 months, that was not good enough. He believes he should be guaranteed the lion’s share for a rubber match long before he’s won the sequel, which is both understandable and bullish, if not necessarily how things work.
Bottom line, Dillian Whyte – at this point – is the challenger and the B-side. He’s already one down (via knockout) to Joshua in their professional rivalry. Joshua has three belts and he has none. All he can do to alter those facts is defeat the A-side and become the champion. He was offered the chance to do that by his promoter; a promoter who has made no secret of his loyalty to Anthony Joshua, but also a promoter who has elevated Dillian Whyte’s standing considerably along the way; a promoter who will always be the fall guy when fans don’t get exactly what they want.
For further context, the 25-30 per cent Whyte was offered for the proposed April date with AJ is a comparable percentage to plenty of heavyweight title challenges of the past. It’s a bigger cut than James J. Braddock was given for defeating Max Baer in 1935, bigger than what Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay) got for walloping Sonny Liston in 1964, it’s a similar to what George Foreman agreed before he dethroned Joe Frazier in 1973, and larger than the one he accepted when he stunned Michael Moorer 21 years later.
And significantly higher than what Douglas grabbed as he marched to the ring, past the bloodthirsty and the doubters, and turned Mike Tyson and the sport on its head in 1990.
The world has changed since then, the money men are there to be shot at and the fighters – quite rightly – have more power and ability to earn bigger than ever before. For now, we must respect Whyte’s decision because the consequences of it are a long way from being realised.
But already it’s easy to wonder. Because it’s easy to look back on history at boxers who were less concerned about percentages and more with actually winning one of the greatest prizes of them all. What if Douglas had turned his back on the opportunity to fight for the world heavyweight title and someone else had stepped in and knocked out Mike Tyson?
Not only that, imagine how he would have felt turning down $1.3m when he realised the man who knocked out Tyson then went on to earn $24m in his first defence.
What we have learned from history, particularly in this boxing world where disaster can strike at any turn, is the best course of action is to make the most of today. Whyte can argue he’s doing that by fighting the likes of Joseph Parker and Dereck Chisora and maybe Breazeale next. But given the see-saw nature of those Parker and Chisora slugfests, it’s far from a certainty he’ll be offered the chance to earn in excess of £20m from two bouts again.
It’s all what-ifs and maybes, admittedly, but it always is until the challenger becomes the champion of the world.
IMAGINE HOW DOUGLAS WOULD HAVE FELT IF HE’D TURNED DOWN MIKE TYSON