by Charles Jay
You know, if I was talking to a guy who was willing to “guarantee” something, I’d kind of want to know how that was possible. I guess that comes as a result of a background in sports betting and handicapping, as we learn very early on that there is no such thing as a “lock.” Someone along the line is going to require you to put your money where your mouth is.
There’s a guy who writes for this site, who got brazen and invaded my Facebook page one day, insisting that a Manny Pacquiao win over Floyd Mayweather was “guaranteed.” Well, I asked him how he knew, and he said he just knew. Where some people come from, that’s evidence, I suppose.
Then I asked him, since Pacquiao was a “guaranteed” winner, what kind of odds he would give me in a man-to-man bet if the fight were indeed to take place. After all, if something is “guaranteed,” you could give me 100/1, right? I mean, would it really matter how high the number was? Even on someone’s most cowardly day, I should be able to get 10/1, right? Well, I didn’t. In fact, I didn’t get a straight answer at all, except to say he would check the odds when they came out.
That should tell you all you need to know about “guarantees.”
So I am kind of interested how Francisco Valcarcel, the president of the World Boxing Organization (WBO) can tell an internet reporter that he “guarantees” there is going to be a fight between Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez in 2012. What I find most interesting is, how is HE in a position to make such a guarantee?
It would seem that the only two people who could guarantee that are the two fighters, should they or their representatives get into a room and sign a contract. Not even Bob Arum, who’s got promotional dibs on Pacquiao, can guarantee such a thing.
What kind of position could someone from a sanctioning body be in to say that?
Yeah, I understand the fact that Pacquiao holds the WBO welterweight title, and that Marquez is the WBO lightweight champion. But as anyone who follows boxing closely is hip to by now, we are long past the point where the true superstars of this game are beholden to any championship belt or sanctioning body, which is to say they are bigger than any title. The president of the WBO can make believe he is guaranteeing something or even mandating it, but the WBO loses a lot more than the fighter, in this case, if they strip him of the title.
I mean, Valcarcel, for all I know, may have a piece of Marquez’s contract. He may be very close to the situation, but I still don’t see that as any basis to guarantee anything. People have been sued for a lot less than that recently.
What I’m getting at is that if he’s talking to an internet reporter about it, why doesn’t that reporter have the presence of mind or the sense of responsibility to ask the question that simply must follow.
We’re trying to get an answer to that question as we speak.
Send this to a friend