Catchweight fights can be great.

Been meaning to do this for a while seems a regular topic with fans these days and the dissatisfaction of catchweights, I agree we have enough divisions and personally would like to see the Jnr divisions scrapped. Nowadays Pacquaio gets a lot of stick as though he started a trend picking on the bigger buy to fight at a fair disadvantage. This isn't the case, some instances where catchweight fights have been good.

CATCHWEIGHT FIGHT 1
Barney Ross SD Jimmy McLarnin

What was the catchweight, and why was it used?
The two fought at 143. Barney Ross, the great Jewish lightweight, wanted to come north to McLarnin but was uncomfortable coming up to 147 - he weighed in at only 138 - so McLarnin agreed not to come in over 143 inspite having fought between 144 and 147 only in recent years.

Was the title at stake?
At stake, changed hands, before in was passed between them twice more in no catchweight WW fights.

Did the catchweight negatively affect either man?
McLarnin claimed it did indeed affect his performance and Pop Foster insisted McLarnin's preperation was badly affected by worry at not being able to make the weight, but the decision was exactly the same as the two that would follow this one - a close, disputed decision.

Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
It got two ATG fighters into the ring together and kept things very, very close which is an accurate reflection of how these two were. A great fight between great fighters that probably wouldn't have been made at 147. A good thing.

Joe Gans D20 Joe Walcott

What was the catchweight and why was it used?
Another meeting between the lightweight and welterweight champions, this fought at 138.

Was a title at stake?

No, neither man's title was at stake - this may be because Walcott did not make the weight - Boxrec lists him at 140. However, sources seem to indicate that this may be incorrect, as Walcott was not made to pay the forfiet he had agreed to.

Did the catchtweight negatively affect either man?
Probably it did. 138 was an ask for the Barbados demon and he seems to have struggled to keep the pressure upon Gans, though this may have more to do with Gans being a master boxer!

Was the Catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
Overall, good getting the two into the ring together was the main thing, and it hurt neither's career with the draw a harmless (though unpopular) result.




Armstrong TKO 6 Jenkins


What was the catchweight and why was it used?
The Catchweight was 139 and it was used so that Jenkins, a lightweight, would not be dwarfed by his great opponent.


Was the title at stake?
No; this was a non-title fight - the catchweight was the possible reason with the two weighing in at the semi-recognised 140lb limit.


Did the catchweight negatively affect either man?
No. Armstrong was his destructive self and Jenkins gave him real trouble, injuring both his eyes.


Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
Brilliant IMO. Two ATG's in a thrilling encounter that couldn't have been made at 147 at that time.


Emile Griffith KO9 Dave Charnley
What was the catchweight and why was it used?

Again, a lightweight and a welterweight. Charnley wasn't big enough to step all the way up so Griffith agreed to weigh in at no more than 145.

Was the title at stake?
No - the fight was a non-title bought, but Charnley, having lost two of his last three, was not really in position to complain. The fight was more about getting a troubled Griffith out of the US than a genuine contest, and Griffith followed it up with another non-title fight, this time at 147.

Was either man negatively affected?
Only Charnley, who took a sound thrashing. Griffith was very much himself.

Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
Probably neither; it's hard to imagine any difference at 147.


Terry Norris KO4 Meldrick Taylor
What was the catchweight and why was it used?

The oddly specific catchweight was 150 1/2lbs. Both men weighed in at 149. The catchweight was in place to make things less difficult for the smaller Norris.

Was the title at stake?
Yes; the WBC light-middleweight title.


Did the catchweight hurt either man?
It's hard to be sure because the fight lasted only four rounds. Probably not.


Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
A good thing; two outstanding champions brought together for a contest in-between their best weights - what's not to like? (Although I know Truss hated this match-up, sorry mate)








Bernard Hopkins KO9 Oscar DeLa Hoya


What was the catchweight and why was it used?
The catchweight was 158, and it was used to allow the much smaller Oscar some leeway.


Was the title at stake?
Yes; the winner would be #1 at middleweight.


Did the catchweight hurt either man?
Ridicoulsy not Hopkins had never weighed in so light in all of his career. He was 39 years old. He would only fight 3 more times at 160 before moving up to light-heavy; but he made a mockery of the catchweight coming in at 156.


Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
Id say mostly good. Oscar didn't belong up there, but it brought Hopkins overground and netted him a big purse, whilst Oscar was allowed a "nothing to lose" shot at true boxing immortality.








Kelly Pavlik UD Jermain Taylor,

What was the catchweight and why was it used?
Even for the first Pavlik fight, Taylor was struggling to neatly make 160 and offered Kelly a non-title fight at above 160; Pavlik quite rightly told him "no". The second time the two met the catchweigt was agreed primarly in to allow Taylor some relief at the weight.


Was the title at stake?
Neither held a title at 168 where the fight was contested.


Did the catchweight hurt either man?
Probably not - and it certainly helped Taylor who showed no signs of the stamina issue that had hurt him in the first fight, Pavlik boxing him to a decision rather than blowing him out.


Was the catchweight a good thing or a bad thing?
It made for an interesting and competitive fight with a defining result. The only negative was no title was at stake.

My point Catchweight fights can be great and something we need.

Cheers

Rodders

They can be, as long as they're fairly done. For the most part, I'm uncomfortable with them as title fights.

If you will allow me another encomium to my greatest boxing hero, my favourite catchweight contest of all is that between Ken Buchanan and Donato Paduano at MSG in 1970. Hugh McIlvanney writes particularly well about this fight, which pitted the newly crowned lightweight champ against Paduano, an undefeated Canadian welterweight who was being highly touted at the time.

Despite the weight differential, Ken boxed circles around Paduano, a performance that went a long way to securing him the American Boxing Writers' award for Fighter of the Year and had some of them reaching for comparisons with Sugar Ray Robinson. Overblown, one might think, but a clue to how highly regarded Buchanan was (and remains) in the States.

Can understand your point about titles on the line Captain especially nowadays with the jnr divisions added. But for omeone like McLarnin and Ross made a catchweight fight that is above 140 to keep McLarnin comfortable, but below 147 to keep Ross frombeing dwarfed. A reasonable compromise that remains totally unaffected by the exsistance and in all we found would be or was the better man.

Will allow anytime you like for Buchanan, I'm a converted big fan since the admiration poured on the old 606 site by yourself & Jimmy for Ken. Nice shout and something worth revisting.

Cheers

Rodders

I have no real issues with catchweights apart from when titles are on the line, because it devalues the whole concept of titles and gives us ridiculous situations where the likes of Manny can run round being proclaimed a light middleweight champion despite never having has a fight there and as you have outlined Rodders it has given us some decent fights in the past.

However my main issue with catchweight fights currently is given we have 17 weight divisions and the gap between some of these is little more than a half decent kebab’s worth they seem a little anachronistic to me. In the days of Armstrong and Ross the gap between their weights was nigh on a stone, a huge amount for a guy of 5ft 5 or similar. For me if a guy is good enough he should be able to go into a fight where his opponent has three or four pound on him and compensate for this with such things as tactics, ability or cunning, it worked for Armstrong and Ross often enough .

Agreed Jeff for the most part mate, but however without the old same day weigh in rules, in some cases for example Pacquiao a small man would be outweighed by the likes of Cotto/DeLaHoya/Margarito from around 10-16lbs I'd imagine come when the first bell rings.

The fact as youve outlined in the case of Pacquiao claiming to be is 7 or 8 time world champ is a joke as you'd rightly pointed out IMO, it wouldnt bother me as much if Margarito was a bonfide champ at the time earning the title and putting his title on the line at his own discretion.

Cheers

Rodders

Well Rodders for me the simple answer is if you can't operate in a division without stips, don't operate there. I personally prefer on the day weigh ins but if you're operating in an era of day before weigh ins you should accept the associated rehydration and weight gain that goes with it.

Good article Rodney.

I'm not a fan of catchweight title fights but if fighters want to do it for non-title fights then good luck to them.

It's all a little bit 'gimmicky' for me though. If a fighter wants to move up and be a genuine champ then there should be no catchweights. The worst example I can think of for a catchweight title fight was Ray Leonard v Donny Lalonde.

You're more straight down the line than Fred Trueman, Jeffrey. As long as its fair I don't have a problem if we get a decent matchup at the end of it.

Thanks Atila, yeah Lalonde V Leonard Its something unfortunately what happens when a glamour fighter is about Lalonde had no issue with it because of the ridiculous payday he received. The biggest name he fought prior was Mustafa Hamsho and I doubt that was a big payday. I reckon he'd have weighed 130 if it meant a fight with Leonard.

Cheers

Rodders

Previously I'd always disagreed with the title being on the line. Now my position has changed slightly....

If you're fighting the welterweight champ and come to a private agreement, and a catchweight of say 145lb, then by definition this a welterweight fight (140lb-147lb).

More importantly, with regard to the title, if the holder agrees to put it on the line and it goes horribly wrong then he has to take responsibility.

TheMackemMawler wrote:Previously I'd always disagreed with the title being on the line. Now my position has changed slightly....

If you're fighting the welterweight champ and come to a private agreement, and a catchweight of say 145lb, then by definition this a welterweight fight (140lb-147lb).

More importantly, with regard to the title, if the holder agrees to put it on the line and it goes horribly wrong then he has to take responsibility.

I disagree with you because I don't think things like weights in title fights should be allowed to be negotiated. The weight limits for welterweight are 140 to 147lbs and that should be it. Both fighters if fighting for the welterweight title should have the choice to weigh in whatever they want as long as it's between the standard limits. Would it be OK with you if the bigger name fighter who wanted to fight for the welterweight title negotiated a limit of 141lbs or even 140.5lbs? Technically, that would still be in the welterweight range limits.

It's best not to allow them to negotiate weight limits at all.

I agree, you could make a catchweight at 140.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001lb...... and it would still be Welterweight. Crazy, I know!

I just think its the champs fault for agreeing to put his title on the line. If he is willing to agree to it, then it doesn't matter if we agree or not.

If he loses, Tuff. Own fault.

Will just say one thing, there is no lower limit of divisions, it's merely 147lbs and below for Welterweight, you could if you wanted weigh in at 134lbs and be under no pressure to weigh more.

I hate titles being on the line, it devalues the whole concept of being the best at the weight, you aren't you're the best at a newly created weight.

If that's correct then it's very interesting and just another difference between the pro and the amateur game..... In the amateurs lower limits apply.

Just as an example MM, Pacquiao weighed in at around 144lbs for his fight against Margarito.

Yeah i looked it up Ghosty and it's true. I can't believe I've got my age and didn't know that about the professional sport.

I think thats why the past weight hoppers get more kudos and deservedly so - they fought people who were much heavier than them sometimes up to 15-20 pounds or on rarer occasions 30

ShahenshahG wrote:I think thats why the past weight hoppers get more kudos and deservedly so - they fought people who were much heavier than them sometimes up to 15-20 pounds or on rarer occasions 30

When i think about it it now seems blindingly obvious.... I just don't think I'd given it much thought.