On the back of Fury’s trainer and uncle Peter Fury informing WBN on Wednesday that a rematch with Klitschko takes precedence over a mandatory fight, Tucker pointed out that this wasn’t the case.
The IBF called for a purse bid for Vyacheslav Glazkov to be handed his shot at Fury as the number one contender, although Peter was of the belief that facing Klitschko again would mean the mandatory could be delayed.
Upon further investigation into the IBF rules and regulations, WBN had it clarified that Fury v Klitschko II in 2016 would then mean Glazkov would be likely to face either Charles Martin or Erkan Teper for the vacant crown.
“To be clear, Tyson Fury must fight Vyacheslav Glazkov next. If they agree terms before December 11 we cancel the purse bid. If it goes to a purse bid, the winning bidder has 90 days to do the fight,” Tucker explained to World Boxing News.
“Regarding the Klitschko rematch taking precedence, it’s just the opposite as the mandatory takes priority of the re-match.
“In fact Rule 3B Return Bout states: No contract for a Championship contest shall contain any clause or provision, whatsoever, guaranteeing or in any way assuring or promising either contestant a return Championship contest where such clause or provision interferes with the mandatory defense of the Title.”
The IBF’s stance means Fury v Klitschko II is set to go ahead next year a belt lighter than in the original last weekend in Germany and only for the WBO, WBA and IBO versions.
This news also brings another one of the championships back into play as Glazkov, or whichever of the next ranked contenders who accepts the offer, will be crowned IBF title holder in the first half of 2016 and be a sure-fire target for WBC ruler Deontay Wilder.
Peter Fury had originally informed WBN that Tyson wanted to fulfill all his mandatory obligations and not drop any of his title belts, although a lucrative and contracted return with Klitschko is set to throw a spanner in the works.