17.12.06 – By Izyaslav “Slava” Koza: With Oleg Maskaev’s easy victory over overmatched Peter Okhello, in Moscow, the rumor mill has gotten wind of a possible Oleg Maskaev vs. Wladimir Klitschko bout in the near future. While for most old timers this is nothing along the lines of Lewis/Holyfield it is one of the better fights that could be made at Heavyweight at this point in time, and as such, should garner enough fan support..
As always, however, there stands an obstacle, and this time it is in the form of a WBC mandatory challenger to be decided December 6th between James Toney and Samuel Peter. The first bout between the two, a controversial decision victory for Peter (although I should note this is a consensus opinion not necessarily mine), forced both camps to do it again this January 6th on Showtime.
The biggest problem right now is that currently, Oleg Maskaev is one down in terms of fulfilling his obligations to fight a mandatory challenger and as such might not be cleared to fight. While Klitschko’s mandatory in the form of politically positioned Ray Austin is promoted by the powerful King, Wladimir should be in the clear, voluntary defense wise since he just sent his mandatory Calvin Brock down face first for the TKO.
The question becomes will the winner of the Peter vs. Toney bout step aside in order to let Klitschko and Maskaev get it on?
Ideally, of course, were fans, or people with less business interest, involved in setting these bouts up, there would be no problem, or rather a simple solution. The Klitschko/Maskaev winner would simply have to face the winner of Peter/Toney or be stripped, and then the winner of that bout would have to go up against Ray Austin, who is not mainstream enough to carry much appeal at this point. Of course, on paper it’s as simple as Tyson/Mcbride but the reality will mostly be rude and unpleasant for most fans.
Ray Austin, Samuel Peter, and James Toney are all promoted by guys with tremendous sway in the ABC organization circles and thus a right to insist on a fight. Therefore, the hope lies with the fighters themselves, or recently and more specifically the winner of the Toney Peter bout, in saying “for now, I’ll step aside for the good of the sport and kick the winner of Maskaev/Klitschko’s two belted backside.”
Recently, the only time I remember this happening, or at least being publicized, is when Steve Cunningham did the right thing and let O’Neill Bell and Jean Mormeck get it on. Unfortunately, Cunningham never got his rightly deserved shot because O’Neill Bell is currently MIA and perhaps staying there for the near future. This turn of events for Cunningham is perhaps precisely why guys are unwilling to risk losing their shot seeing as they don’t know when or if they will get another one, thereby, justifying apparent selfishness.
However, taking all that in, and taking into account a fighter’s viewpoint, the desire of fans to see a unification bout does not waiver in most instances. The desire to see James Toney or Sam Peter make a real gesture to the fans, no matter how hard it is for them personally, and be confident enough and vocal enough in pointing out their generosity and willingness to do something for the good of the sport by not demanding a fight.
Finally, if the winner of the January 6th clash does do the right thing for the sport, this should not give the two belt holders any leniency to postpone the fight. The bout should be signed and sealed in such a timeframe where it takes place while the winner of the eliminator bout is recuperating. Only then will there be a chance of it coming off, with all sides, including promoters agreeing, that there is a better chance for more money in working together with their and other fighters, and being confident enough in their own ability, to beat all comers in such an order that helps the sport along.
Simple Minded Wishing, but hey you never know.