“Duva Boxing and Cavazos Boxing have an exclusive promotional agreement with James De La Rosa.”
| Promoter Dino Duva of Duva Boxing says he was “shocked” to read that representatives of his undefeated welterweight prospect, James De La Rosa (19-0, 12 KOs), are proclaiming the young fighter’s promotional free agency. “It is news to me that he’s a free agent,” revealed Duva. “I read his press release with disbelief. Duva Boxing and Cavazos Boxing have an exclusive promotional agreement with James De La Rosa and I don’t understand how they can claim to be a free agent. In fact, it’s my understanding that Cavazos Boxing have James scheduled for a fight in Texas in September or October.” Duva contends (and Team De La Rosa admits) he’s done a great job promoting the 21-year-old Texan and will be contacting the fighter and his manager directly to get to the bottom of the situation. “We feel we’ve done a superb job promoting James. We ran into a few roadblocks the last several months due to other people interfering with his career, but we still have a valid and existing contract.” By no means a newcomer to the business of boxing, the seasoned Duva says he’s still 100% committed to De La Rosa’s career and wishes for a speedy resolution to the unexpected turn of events. “We love James, but it appears he may be getting damaging and confusing advice. I will be talking to him and his manager immediately, to try and get things back on track in an amicable way. I have absolutely no idea what their announcement of free agency is about and I had no advance knowledge that this would be happening. I hope when I speak to them they will agree James is not a free agent because I am ready to promote James all the way to becoming the superstar I believe he has the potential to be. However, if we are not able to resolve this amicably immediately, and/or there’s something underhanded relating to this announcement, and someone has interfered with my contract, I will vigorously defend my position, challenge theirs legally and hold anyone responsible for damages incurred.” |
Leave a Reply