Ahhhh a good fight, but IBF (read: any sancrioning body) is weird.
They ditch the champ that abided by their rehydration clause for the guy that didn't. Yeah, I know the first reply will be about mandatory defenses, and I know after my reply the second one will be something to the effect of, "but sanctioning bodies can do what they want." It's just random and hypocritical when in the past they let a guy hold a belt in two weight classes from the same organization without defending and then do nothing about it (when there is a rule there), and then strip a champ's title for a rationale that suddenly becomes more stringent.
I'm looking forward to the fight, but they could have fought without the IBF's mandatory ruling. I wonder why they didn't (please, don't think this is a cue for "it doesn't matter," that's a moot statement)