Team Mayweather: 147 for Canelo or no fight

First topic message reminder :

According to Steve Kim, Team Mayweather is saying that WBA/WBC junior middleweight champion Saul “Canelo” Alvarez will have to come down to 147 if he wants to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. on September 14th. There won’t be a catchweight of 150 and Mayweather won’t move up in weight to fight Canelo at his weight.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/2013/mayweather-147-for-canelo-or-no-fight/


Crap article full of guff, the writer is poor but I wonder if there is any truth in the story.


------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Seems this story is growIng legs, from BoxingScene:



According to Jose "Chepo" Reynoso, trainer of WBC/WBA 154-pound champion Saul "Canelo" Alvarez (44-0-1, 30KOs), there is a weight issue that has to be worked out in order to fight WBC welterweight champion Floyd Mayweather Jr. (44-0, 26KOs) on September 14 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas.

Chepo claims that Mayweather wants the fight to take place at the welterweight limit of 147-pounds. Canelo wants to fight at the junior middleweight limit. Chepo says there is "0" chance of the bout take place at 147. They did propose the idea of having a catch-weight, which Mayweather rejected.

"Floyd wants every advantage on his side. Among one of the things that is often being stressed is that he wants Canelo at a lower weight. Why would I make my boy sacrifice so much? We proposed an intermediate weight for things to be level for both [fighters], but he refused. Yes we want to fight, but that does not mean [Mayweather] will get everything [he wants]," Chepo said to Erika Montoya.

The weight was an obvious concern when this fight was first discussed. Mayweather walks around close to the welterweight limit, while Canelo weighs over 170-pounds on the night of his fights. Mayweather hold the WBA's "super title" at 154, but he defeated Miguel Cotto, a small junior welterweight, to capture that title.

mobilemaster8 wrote:Legacy harmed by not fighting someone who was handed a world title against Matthew Hatton. Yeh cheers. Then defended against bums. Okay. Pulling power yes......proven track record and world class? Nope.

Khan, Garcia, Alexander have proved double what Alvarez has.

The Catch 22 of points like this and the aforementioned 'deserves a few easy defences' is, of course, well why not take the fight then if Canelo is such an unworthy adversary?

TopHat24/7 wrote:

mobilemaster8 wrote:Legacy harmed by not fighting someone who was handed a world title against Matthew Hatton. Yeh cheers. Then defended against bums. Okay. Pulling power yes......proven track record and world class? Nope.

Khan, Garcia, Alexander have proved double what Alvarez has.

The Catch 22 of points like this and the aforementioned 'deserves a few easy defences' is, of course, well why not take the fight then if Canelo is such an unworthy adversary?

Must be because he brings no money to the table, no wait it's Alvarez who is the biggest draw of anyone Floyd could fight.

It is not as simple as that though is it mobile. Whilst Floyd has fought at light middle before he is not a natural at the weight, as such every time he steps up there it creates an element of excitement and risk, when one adds in he will be fighting a young, hungry fighter who is pretty big at the weight these elements are only amplified, hence the anticipation from fans.

Whether the names you have mentioned have achieved more they are natural welters or light welters and as such would be facing Floyd at a weight he is most comfortable with and as such the what ifs that are present for Floyd at light middle are simply not present. I personally think Floyd beats Alvarez, however I would stake every penny I own on him beating the other three.

Alvarez is 22, obviously he isn't going have a better record than Khan etc but right now he's the best in his respective weight category while Khan and Alexander aren't. I also can't believe you said Garcia has achieved more than Canelo as Canelo has only fought past it's while Garcia has wins over past it fighters like Morales and Judah, complete contradiction

Saul fought at 151 against the dangerous, mighty Matthew Hatton. Of course he can lose another 4lbs. Just eat less burritos. Also he fought at 149 against fat Cotto.

He can make 147 with the propper diet and training. Saul wants all the advantages and he's not even the big name. He's ducking. He wants to fight Floyd? Come on down.

You were telling us that Mayweather is number one at Light-Middleweight the other day Az, were you not? So why can't he fight his closest rival to that crown at that weight?

Again, you've been vocal in how disappointing it was that Manny 'forced' De la Hoya to come in at 147 and how the 145 catchweight against Cotto taints that win. How is it different in Mayweather's case?

Exactly Chris. Many said that the 2lbs cotto lost had no effect on him. So why not the same for saul?

I'd like to think that after the utter debacle that was negotiations between team Floyd and Team Manny, Mayweather wouldn't want to endure the years of negative publicity that could potentially plague him with Alvarez.

Can't secure a massive payday with one of the top guys out there, that's unfortunate. can't secure a fight with another of the top guys out there? That's slightly more suspicious

azania wrote:Exactly Chris. Many said that the 2lbs cotto lost had no effect on him. So why not the same for saul?

The point is if the 2 lbs had no effect on Cotto 'and I believe it didn't as Manny would have won either way' BUT why did they impose the catch weight if it wasn't gonna make a difference? Also I hate catch weights as you should be allowed to the UPPER limit of the weight class, its worse if their is a belt on the line as 150, 151, 152, is not a weightclass and is not the UPPER limit, the limit is upto 154 so therefore you should be allowed to weigh between the limit but up to 154. Anyone who agrees with catch weights where the belt is on the line is just not seeing the bigger picture.

I'm not asking about what other people said. You said that Manny's wins were tainted and that he should have fought Oscar and Cotto at 154 and the full Welterweight limit respectively. So now I'm interested to know why you've come up with such a u-turn.

Cotto had weighed 146 for his two previous fights, both of which had been within the nine months prior to facing Pacquiao at 145. On the other hand, Alvarez (who as such a young man has still been growing in to his frame in recent years, by the way) hasn't weighed anything less than 154 for over two years and six fights. You're not asking Alvarez to come down 1 or 2 lb, you're asking him to come down 7 lb to a whole lower weight class.

Pacquiao had been fighting at 130 lb a little over a year and a half before he fought Cotto at the 145 catchweight. It was only twelve months ago that Mayweather himself was fighting Cotto at 154, on the other hand. Worlds apart.

There is absolutely no reason why a fight between the two best Light-Middleweights in the world right now should be happening at Welterweight.

88Chris05 wrote:I'm not asking about what other people said. You said that Manny's wins were tainted and that he should have fought Oscar and Cotto at 154 and the full Welterweight limit respectively. So now I'm interested to know why you've come up with such a u-turn.

Cotto had weighed 146 for his two previous fights, both of which had been within the nine months prior to facing Pacquiao at 145. On the other hand, Alvarez (who as such a young man has still been growing in to his frame in recent years, by the way) hasn't weighed anything less than 154 for over two years and six fights. You're not asking Alvarez to come down 1 or 2 lb, you're asking him to come down 7 lb to a whole lower weight class.

Pacquiao had been fighting at 130 lb a little over a year and a half before he fought Cotto at the 145 catchweight. It was only twelve months ago that Mayweather himself was fighting Cotto at 154, on the other hand. World's apart.

There is absolutely no reason why a fight between the two best Light-Middleweights in the world right now should be happening at Welterweight.

My pointy exactly

I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

88Chris05 wrote:I'm not asking about what other people said. You said that Manny's wins were tainted and that he should have fought Oscar and Cotto at 154 and the full Welterweight limit respectively. So now I'm interested to know why you've come up with such a u-turn.

Cotto had weighed 146 for his two previous fights, both of which had been within the nine months prior to facing Pacquiao at 145. On the other hand, Alvarez (who as such a young man has still been growing in to his frame in recent years, by the way) hasn't weighed anything less than 154 for over two years and six fights. You're not asking Alvarez to come down 1 or 2 lb, you're asking him to come down 7 lb to a whole lower weight class.

Pacquiao had been fighting at 130 lb a little over a year and a half before he fought Cotto at the 145 catchweight. It was only twelve months ago that Mayweather himself was fighting Cotto at 154, on the other hand. Worlds apart.

There is absolutely no reason why a fight between the two best Light-Middleweights in the world right now should be happening at Welterweight.

No. I said Manny's wins are tainted but excuse the Oscar fight as Oscar asked to fight at 147. Cotto is inexcusible. That is very tainted. But many people here have said Cotto was a great win which I disagree with.

I have said time and time again that Floyd will beat Saul whatever weight he fights at. I believe Floyd having fought at 154 and is a bonafide champion owes it to the fans to fight at 154.

superflyweight wrote:I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

In fairness to chris he does know something about Boxing..even If he hates Mayweather.

Are you lost ???

superflyweight wrote:I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

That really is a rookie error.

Floyd vs Guerrero is a great fight against P4P number 8 (we'll accept ring rankings here but I'm sure Az will ignore their number 1 ranking of Matthysse at Light welterweight).

Guerrero has 2 fights at Welterweight makes him a Welterweight not a blown up Featherweight (where he spent 7 years and last fought there in 08.)

Floyd has 2 fights at Light Middleweight but he's still a blown up Super Featherweight (where he spent 6 years and last fought there in 01)

Floyd can fight Guerrero and its a great win though as he's P4P number 8 but Alvarez isn't allowed to fight Floyd though in a division he's champion in and is P4P number 1, that would be madness.

I prefer rookie errors........

"Hearns was to big for Duran...hence it was a mismatch" But Floyd 130-154..he's not too small...........

"Take Hearns who'd never fought at middle before out and Hagler beat a load of s**te...Didn't want Spinks though" But he's an alltime great and not a ducker.........

"Leonard fought at supermiddle and won a title..fought there twice and came down because he wasn't a natural supermidd"

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

In fairness to chris he does know something about Boxing..even If he hates Mayweather.

Are you lost ???

Yeah, I was looking for your weightlifting article about the importance of feeling the pump. Never fails to make me laugh.

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

In fairness to chris he does know something about Boxing..even If he hates Mayweather.

Are you lost ???

Yeah, I was looking for your weightlifting article about the importance of feeling the pump. Never fails to make me laugh.

Not as funny as the "Which body part to do want to stick out?" article

It is important...People forget to work the muscle and focus on the amount of weight....

Another subject you're out of your depth on.....but I'll forgive you!!

DAVE - Stick to talking to Steffan about underage girls...........

It's not the subject matter, it's the title that makes me chuckle.

Can't lift weights as I damaged my rotator cuff a few years back and so I stick to running and keeping my Guiness intake to a minimum. It'll do for me!

Used to have a six pack but no-one ever saw it so didn't see the point of being "buff" for no reason.

DAVE667 wrote:Used to have a six pack but no-one ever saw it so didn't see the point .

I don't see any point in you either..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Used to have a six pack but no-one ever saw it so didn't see the point .

I don't see any point in you either..

Probably going to be difficult when you have you head so far up your hole most of the time. Still, look at it as rectal yoga!

Heavy Benching and Squatting makes it hard for my head to reach that far...

The price you pay for perfection!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I prefer rookie errors........

"Hearns was to big for Duran...hence it was a mismatch" But Floyd 130-154..he's not too small...........

"Take Hearns who'd never fought at middle before out and Hagler beat a load of s**te...Didn't want Spinks though" But he's an alltime great and not a ducker.........

"Leonard fought at supermiddle and won a title..fought there twice and came down because he wasn't a natural supermidd"

The Hearns loss doesn't take away from Durans Lightweight achievements and his beating of an ATG Welterweight bang in his prime but it does count against his all time standing, the same would go if Floyd were to lose to Alvarez. It doesn't stop Floyd being possibly the best Super Featherweight I've ever seen or take anything away from his other great performances.

No one ranks Hagler higher than Floyd, no one ranks Louis higher than Floyd. I don't know why you keep bringing these two guys up. They fought a lot of rubbish in their time and aren't rated in most top 15 lists whereas Floyd is in most peoples top 15, whats the issue here?

I think Leonard only went back down in weight in his come back didn't he? Hardly something people rate Leonard on when evaluating his career. Unless you mean when he went back down in weight to fight Hearns at Welter which is hardly an easy nights work!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Heavy Benching and Squatting makes it hard for my head to reach that far...

The price you pay for perfection!!

But clearly not impossible!!!!!!!

bellchees wrote:

superflyweight wrote:I think I see where you're going wrong, Chris. You're trying to use reason and sense. You'd be better served not reading other posters' posts or deliberately misrepresenting what they are saying. Failing that you could just tell people to "shut up".

That really is a rookie error.

Floyd vs Guerrero is a great fight against P4P number 8 (we'll accept ring rankings here but I'm sure Az will ignore their number 1 ranking of Matthysse at Light welterweight).

Guerrero has 2 fights at Welterweight makes him a Welterweight not a blown up Featherweight (where he spent 7 years and last fought there in 08.)

Floyd has 2 fights at Light Middleweight but he's still a blown up Super Featherweight (where he spent 6 years and last fought there in 01)

Floyd can fight Guerrero and its a great win though as he's P4P number 8 but Alvarez isn't allowed to fight Floyd though in a division he's champion in and is P4P number 1, that would be madness.

I can't believe people are defending this claim if it's true. If he doesn't want the fight, then that's alright I guess, he's at a point in his career where he gets to basically pick the fights he wants. I just don't want to hear anyone claim that he genuinely wanted the fight if it doesn't get made. The idea that Alvarez could get down to 147 is ridiculous, he's getting bigger all the time and will probably end up at Middleweight in the next few years.

sittingringside wrote:I can't believe people are defending this claim if it's true. If he doesn't want the fight, then that's alright I guess, he's at a point in his career where he gets to basically pick the fights he wants. I just don't want to hear anyone claim that he genuinely wanted the fight if it doesn't get made. The idea that Alvarez could get down to 147 is ridiculous, he's getting bigger all the time and will probably end up at Middleweight in the next few years.

Alvarez should agree to it with no intention of actually making weight like Floyd did against Marquez.

sittingringside wrote:I can't believe people are defending this claim if it's true. If he doesn't want the fight, then that's alright I guess, he's at a point in his career where he gets to basically pick the fights he wants. I just don't want to hear anyone claim that he genuinely wanted the fight if it doesn't get made. The idea that Alvarez could get down to 147 is ridiculous, he's getting bigger all the time and will probably end up at Middleweight in the next few years.

That's because you're still a relative rookie round here. A little longer, and you'll soon realise that the real surprise is when no one defends the indefensible

bellchees wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I prefer rookie errors........

"Hearns was to big for Duran...hence it was a mismatch" But Floyd 130-154..he's not too small...........

"Take Hearns who'd never fought at middle before out and Hagler beat a load of s**te...Didn't want Spinks though" But he's an alltime great and not a ducker.........

"Leonard fought at supermiddle and won a title..fought there twice and came down because he wasn't a natural supermidd"

The Hearns loss doesn't take away from Durans Lightweight achievements and his beating of an ATG Welterweight bang in his prime but it does count against his all time standing, the same would go if Floyd were to lose to Alvarez. It doesn't stop Floyd being possibly the best Super Featherweight I've ever seen or take anything away from his other great performances.

No one ranks Hagler higher than Floyd, no one ranks Louis higher than Floyd. I don't know why you keep bringing these two guys up. They fought a lot of rubbish in their time and aren't rated in most top 15 lists whereas Floyd is in most peoples top 15, whats the issue here?

I think Leonard only went back down in weight in his come back didn't he? Hardly something people rate Leonard on when evaluating his career. Unless you mean when he went back down in weight to fight Hearns at Welter which is hardly an easy nights work!

Doubt that. Some numpties believe he is the best combination puncher who ever lived. And the hardest and best puncher ever.

Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

azania wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

So? That doesn't make it right. Shouldn't the self proclaimed greatest want to take on the big challenges? Top boxers fight 3 times a year of we are lucky. I don't watch half their fights because they are obviously a gimme fight.

Until more concrete info comes out then we should hold judgement.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

azania wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

So? That doesn't make it right. Shouldn't the self proclaimed greatest want to take on the big challenges? Top boxers fight 3 times a year of we are lucky. I don't watch half their fights because they are obviously a gimme fight.

Like Leonard vs Price....Dave boy Green..............or Hagler v Hamsho........Fulmenjias or Maybe Ali v Wepner.......Ali v Foster!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

azania wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

So? That doesn't make it right. Shouldn't the self proclaimed greatest want to take on the big challenges? Top boxers fight 3 times a year of we are lucky. I don't watch half their fights because they are obviously a gimme fight.

Like Leonard vs Price....Dave boy Green..............or Hagler v Hamsho........Fulmenjias or Maybe Ali v Wepner.......Ali v Foster!!

What's your point truss? Fighters have done it in the past so that makes it ok for Floyd.

If he had taken on Manny/Williams/Cotto anywhere near their primes I might be more forgiving.

Listen, if I was him I would do the same. Take on low risk fights for huge money. Just don't fill me full of crap telling me he top 10.

I have my doubts about the truth of that story. All from the Mexicans who are manouvering for a shot at the big time. I call it BS.

They're even trying to do a catchweight fight in their desperation. If he can make 151 as he assumes, then lose another 4lbs. Eat healthy. Greens. Beyonce lost a shed load on maple syrup I hear. She leeked better for it and that booty!!! Wow. What a booty.

My advice to Alvarez? Atkins or Maple Syrup.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

azania wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

So? That doesn't make it right. Shouldn't the self proclaimed greatest want to take on the big challenges? Top boxers fight 3 times a year of we are lucky. I don't watch half their fights because they are obviously a gimme fight.

Like Leonard vs Price....Dave boy Green..............or Hagler v Hamsho........Fulmenjias or Maybe Ali v Wepner.......Ali v Foster!!

What's your point truss? Fighters have done it in the past so that makes it ok for Floyd.

If he had taken on Manny/Williams/Cotto anywhere near their primes I might be more forgiving.

Listen, if I was him I would do the same. Take on low risk fights for huge money. Just don't fill me full of crap telling me he top 10.

He's fought 4 of the current p4p best at one time or another....only Leonard has ever done that..........

Robbo had easy fights..Ali did...Louis......

My point is why should he be different.

Ali and Leonard took part in some of the biggest fights in history against a calibre of fighter could only dream of having on his CV. That is the difference.

DelaHoya isn't in Frazier's or Foreman's class ???? Duran is the only leonard opponent who belongs above DelaHoya and he was a lightweight some would say..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:DelaHoya isn't in Frazier's or Foreman's class ???? Duran is the only leonard opponent who belongs above DelaHoya and he was a lightweight some would say..

De la Hoya had fought something like once in 30 months.

He'd just beaten Mayorga in his last fight...who would go on to beat Vargas in his next fight...

We can all find fault..........Hagler hadn't boxed in 13 months when Leonard beat him.......

I have Leonard and Ali above Mayweather..............anyway...

Ali is my number 1.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

azania wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Why should Floyd have an easy defence. Why should any fighter be given an easy fight, what is the point?

Boxing should be the best facing the best. Can't for the life of me understand why so called fans try to justify reasons or fights not happening.

Because every other fighter has a gimme fight. Some more than others. Alvarez has made a career of soft fights. Given the title via the menacing Hatton and defended it against bum after bum. Trout was a quality win though.

So? That doesn't make it right. Shouldn't the self proclaimed greatest want to take on the big challenges? Top boxers fight 3 times a year of we are lucky. I don't watch half their fights because they are obviously a gimme fight.

Like Leonard vs Price....Dave boy Green..............or Hagler v Hamsho........Fulmenjias or Maybe Ali v Wepner.......Ali v Foster!!

What's your point truss? Fighters have done it in the past so that makes it ok for Floyd.

If he had taken on Manny/Williams/Cotto anywhere near their primes I might be more forgiving.

Listen, if I was him I would do the same. Take on low risk fights for huge money. Just don't fill me full of crap telling me he top 10.

He's fought 4 of the current p4p best at one time or another....only Leonard has ever done that..........

Robbo had easy fights..Ali did...Louis......

My point is why should he be different.

Manny has fought plenty of guys in the Ring Magazine P4P list at the time of the fight. 9 different fights against 6 different people.

Barrera 1, Morales 1, Barrera 2, Marquez 2, Hatton, Cotto, Marquez 3, Bradley, Marquez 4.

Floyd has fought 7..........Change the fought to "beaten"....

I mean't beat.........Duran of course has fought more If you count the slaps!!

And lost to many of them.

That's why he's not as good as Floyd, but at least he made the big fights happen...........

Yes by cheating and making people drag to make catchweight!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Yes by cheating and making people drag to make catchweight!!

Good job Floyd would never do this.

He hasn't done it yet.

He just sets them then ignores. Much better.