2007-01-25 04:31:09 · 5 answers · asked by zebbie g 2 in Sports ➔ Boxing
The WBA was threatening to strip him of the title if he didn't first fight Tillis. There had been a deadline for him to set up a fight against the principal contender, and at the deadline that contender was Tillis.
It was either fight Tillis or lose the title.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806E6D81138F93AA15755C0A967948260
2007-01-25 05:52:03 · answer #1 · answered by Craig S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
IT IS OBVIOUS THAT COONEY WASN'T THE #1 CONTENDER THAT WAS RATED BY THE WBA. I CAN FIND NOTHING TO SUBSTANTIATE YOUR CLAIM THAT COONEY WAS RANKED #1. RING MAGAZINE HAD COONEY RANKED #2
A MANDATORY TITLE DEFENSE IS A GOOD THING TO HAVE. YOU MUST REMEMBER HOW MANY GREAT FIGHTERS WERE DUCKED PRE-1960'S, EXAMPLE; ARCHIE WAS 36 BEFORE HE GOT A CHANCE TO FIGHT FOR A TITLE.
2007-01-27 06:48:53 · answer #2 · answered by smitty 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the sport of boxing has been corrupt since it's inception.
It has nothing to do with sport, fairness or competition. It has all to do with making the most money...handcuffing fighters to have to pay the right promoters to get the right fights.
The fights are real, but everything about setting them up is crooked as can be.
2007-01-25 04:38:57 · answer #3 · answered by Captain Jack 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes he was the number one contender
Answered By:
Fares AlSagri
Jan 29, 2007
2007-01-29 01:17:49 · answer #4 · answered by fox 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
money baby!
2007-01-25 13:57:48 · answer #5 · answered by saxaphonist 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋