Don King: Klitschko is missing his binky blanket!

Demands WBC strip oft-injured champ

06/11/2005

Don King: Klitschko is missing his binky blanket!

By G. Leon and Scott Shaffer

As soon as Vitali Klitschko announced that a knee injury would cause him to postpone his bout against Hasim Rahman for a fourth time, it was only a matter of time before Rahman’s promoter, Don King, demanded that the WBC strip Klitschko of his heavyweight title. Today, the other shoe dropped as King’s attorney Judd Burstein, sent WBC president Jose Sulaiman a letter accusing Klitschko of faking his injury and calling for the title to be taken away.  “The rules require that Mr. Klitschko be stripped. [He] does not deserve to be champion,” wrote Burstein. “It appears to us that he is a malingerer.  How else can one explain the fact that Dr. Tony Daly had concluded that Mr. Klitschko could fight with a brace the way that many other athletes perform?  That is what true champions do.  Instead, Mr. Klitschko -- just as Mr. Rahman and Mr. King predicted he would do -- has manufactured an excuse not to fight.  Perhaps the real reason for his ducking this bout is that, as we have heard, Mr. Klitschko was recently knocked down twice in sparring.  Or maybe his “binky blanket” is missing and he is too upset to compete.  Whatever the true reason (and it unlikely that the reason is a real injury), Mr. Klitschko does not show the resolve, courage and integrity that the WBC should demand of its champions.” Dayley is the physician who examined Klitschko at the request of Bob Arum, who was to promote the Klitschko-Rahman bout on November 12, 2005.  Klitschko has claimed his own physician diagnosed a more serious problem than Dayley did, namely a torn meniscus, but Klitschko says he hopes to reschedule the bout.

HERE IS JUDD BURSTEIN'S LETTER IN ITS ENTIRETY:

Dear President Sulaiman:

    On behalf of Hasim Rahman and Don King Productions, Inc., I write to request that the WBC immediately strip Vitali Klitschko of his WBC Heavyweight Championship Title and install Mr. Rahman, presently the WBC Interim Champion, as the WBC Heavyweight Champion.   Mr. Klitschko has not defended his title since December 4, 2004.  Plainly, it will now be impossible for him to participate in a bout by December 3, 2005.

    Pursuant to WBC Rule 1.28, “[a] Champion or an interim champion not defending his title within one (1) year will lose his title....”  Here, because Mr. Rahman is already the interim champion, he must now be declared the undisputed WBC Champion.

    Significantly, there is no room for the exercise of discretion by the WBC on this issue.  In contrast to other sections of its rules, Rule 1.28 is unequivocal, providing that the Champion “will lose his title.”  (Emphasis supplied)  Reference to Rule 1.27 makes this conclusion even more inescapable.  Pursuant to Rule 1.27, a WBC Champion must defend every six months unless he has a medical excuse.  Plainly, then, Rule 1.28 assumes that a medical condition will be one of the reasons that could cause inactivity for a year and necessarily lead to the loss of the title.

    Putting aside the fact the rules require that Mr. Klitschko be stripped, he does not deserve to be champion.  It appears to us that he is a malingerer.  How else can one explain the fact that  Dr. Tony Daly had concluded that Mr. Klitschko could fight with a brace the way that many other athletes perform?  That is what true champions do.  Instead, Mr. Klitschko -- just as Mr. Rahman and Mr. King predicted he would do -- has manufactured an excuse not to fight.  Perhaps the real reason for his ducking this bout is that, as we have heard, Mr. Klitschko was recently knocked down twice in sparring.  Or maybe his “binky blanket” is missing and he is too upset to compete.  Whatever the true reason (and it unlikely that the reason is a real injury), Mr. Klitschko does not show the resolve, courage and integrity that the WBC should demand of its champions.

    Finally, although unnecessary, we enclose a copy of Mr. Rahman’s bout agreement with Top Rank.  As you can see, there is no provision in it obligating Mr. Rahman to engage in the fight if it is postponed.

                            Respectfully yours,

                            Judd Burstein