Is anybody a fan of catchweight??

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 7:24 pm

CATCHWEIGHT ...Certainly been interesting back in the 80's with say Spinks-Hagler at 168 or something....Curry-Hagler at 155...Bramble-Nelson at 132....To me however it just seems wrong to fight for a title at 147 etc and force a guy to come in at a lower weight.....Now I'm not having a pop at Manny as guys like Leonard, Mayweather etc have all been guilty of this.......

Maybe if Robbo had forced Maxim in at a lower weight he would now be the undisputed number 1 etc...Certainly swap him for Ali had he done so!!

I don't know I just think we've had weight limits for years and years....tampering to gain an edge on someone seems wrong...fight him at the limit!!

On the otherhand we've probably had fights we wouldn't have had.....Double edged sword....

But maybe it's at too bigger price...

Catchweight is not for me...but is anybody a fan???

by **88Chris05** Tue 10 May 2011, 7:40 pm

I can categorically say that I'm no fan of them, Truss. Seventeen different weight classes, with none of them aside from Cruiserweight being separated by more than 7 lb from the one underneath; is anyone seriously going to argue that this doesn't represent enough scope already to do away with catchweight fights? Just seems ridiculous to me.

Granted, I can see the appeal back in say, the thirties to fifties, where there were far fewer weight classes. I can understand that catchweights were used then and enabled us to see some cracking fights. But with so many weight classes now, whenever I see a catchweight fight announced, more often than not I find myself wondering where the friggin' hell people are going to draw the line.

The weight classes are there for a reason. If someone is clearly too big / small or heavy / light for you, then simply don't fight them is the way I'd see it. And like it or not, the primary aim and result of a catchweight is to put a certain fighter at a disadvantage. The whole "Oh, a couple of lb or so doesn't make any difference" argument gets under my skin a bit. If it doesn't make any difference, then why do you need it?

As I said, back in the day I probably wouldn't have been too fussed by catchweights, and in the days of far fewer divisions they were more of a necessity, no doubt. But nowadays? Not a fan of them at all, seems daft to me considering the weight classes we have in place now.

by Imperial Ghosty Tue 10 May 2011, 7:41 pm

One of britains greatest ever boxers got screwed over by a catchweight, Jack 'kid' Berg forced to defend his 140lb title against Tony Canzoneri at 135lbs with both titles on the line, never liked them and never will. As much as I rate Sugar Ray Leonard I simply cannot accept him being a 5 weight world champion, his 168lb title meant next to nothing at the time and he never fought at 175lbs.

by Lumbering_Jack Tue 10 May 2011, 7:42 pm

Not for me. We have 17 weight divisions in boxing, more than enough.

Only reason for catchweights is so that the vultures of boxing can gain an unfair advantage on the scales.

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 7:51 pm

It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

Yahoo

by Valero's Conscience Tue 10 May 2011, 7:52 pm

With just a few pounds between the weights it's totally inexcusable to have catchweights.

Can't see on any level how they cab be justified.

If you can't make the weight, don't fight in it.

by Valero's Conscience Tue 10 May 2011, 7:56 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

How to you defend World Title fights at catchweights?

Manny neve fought at 154ibs and never fought a boxer who weighed in on the contracted weigh in day at 154ibs and he and his team have confirmed he'll never fight at 154ibs. How D4, can you say Manny is a champ at 154ibs?

I know you never mentioned Manny but that's all you have on the brain.

by Bob Tue 10 May 2011, 8:00 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

So you admit Cotto and Marg were disadvantaged severely, just not too severely.......

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 8:01 pm

Bob wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

So you admit Cotto and Marg were disadvantaged severely, just not too severely.......

Pacquiao was the one disadvantaged, check the weights on the scales and in the ring, if you don't believe me.

by Scottrf Tue 10 May 2011, 8:03 pm

Without titles, why not? If it means the fight might not happen otherwise like Williams-Martines or Pascal-Hopkins then I'm all for it. A title shouldn't be on the line though.

by Adam D Tue 10 May 2011, 8:03 pm

TRUSSMAN - YOU NEED TO READ YOUR PM.

I have asked you nicely since this afternoon to do so.

by manos de piedra Tue 10 May 2011, 8:06 pm

Scottrf wrote:Without titles, why not? If it means the fight might not happen otherwise like Williams-Martines or Pascal-Hopkins then I'm all for it. A title shouldn't be on the line though.

These fights should happen anyway without catchweights though. It shouldnt come down to haggling over a few pounds on the scales to make big fights happen.

by Valero's Conscience Tue 10 May 2011, 8:10 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
Bob wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

So you admit Cotto and Marg were disadvantaged severely, just not too severely.......

Pacquiao was the one disadvantaged, check the weights on the scales and in the ring, if you don't believe me.

You could argue this greater for Haye vs Valuev.

Haye was outweighed by Valuev by considerably more and disadvantaged in terms of reach, height etc far more than Manny against Marg.

Also Haye was seen as more nimble, quick and skilled etc than Valuev, the same as Manny against Valuev.

Using your reasons, would you give him even greater credit than Manny?

Marg was picked purely because he isn't extremely skilled, slow and will allow himself to stand there and take punches. HE was custom picked by Top Rank for Manny to claim another "World Title".

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 8:11 pm

Pavlik vs Taylor II, both fighers happier at 164lbs.

What is the problem.

I couldn't care what weight fighters fight at as long hindered by the excess weight or having to cut too much.

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 8:13 pm

Valero's Conscience wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:
Bob wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:It is great, bring great fighters from different weight classes together without disadvantaging one too severely.

So you admit Cotto and Marg were disadvantaged severely, just not too severely.......

Pacquiao was the one disadvantaged, check the weights on the scales and in the ring, if you don't believe me.

You could argue this greater for Haye vs Valuev.

Haye was outweighed by Valuev by considerably more and disadvantaged in terms of reach, height etc far more than Manny against Marg.

Also Haye was seen as more nimble, quick and skilled etc than Valuev, the same as Manny against Valuev.

Using your reasons, would you give him even greater credit than Manny?

Marg was picked purely because he isn't extremely skilled, slow and will allow himself to stand there and take punches. HE was custom picked by Top Rank for Manny to claim another "World Title".

No different rules apply once you get over 15 stone.

by Scottrf Tue 10 May 2011, 8:16 pm

manos de piedra wrote:These fights should happen anyway without catchweights though. It shouldnt come down to haggling over a few pounds on the scales to make big fights happen.

Should, but a lot of things should happen differently in boxing. Not particularly a fan, but it's not a big problem.

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 8:16 pm

Nelson vs Gans catchweight 131lbs.

Great fight.

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 8:18 pm

Hopkins vs De La Hoya catchweight again, come to think of it Hopkins is the catchweight king of recent times?

by Scottrf Tue 10 May 2011, 8:21 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:Hopkins vs De La Hoya catchweight again, come to think of it Hopkins is the catchweight king of recent times?

by **HumanWindmill** Tue 10 May 2011, 8:26 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:Nelson vs Gans catchweight 131lbs.

Great fight.

Not so.

Ringside weight of 133lb., different thing altogether and very common as a lightweight limit in the day. Gans and Nelson were both genuine lightweights.

How do you fancy Pacquiao v Martinez at catchweight ?

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 8:51 pm

What is a pm......

by **oxring** Tue 10 May 2011, 8:53 pm

I'm quite a fan actually.

Most of the exhibition fights in the days of yore were at catchweights. Where the champion would fight a challenger at a weight set above the belt weight limit. As such - the belt wouldn't be on the line.

SRR, for one, fell foul when he'd set a catchweight of 149 for a WW fight (he'd come in at 147) and his challenger (I temporarily forget who) breached contract and weighed in at 146 - so Robbo's WW title was on the line. SRR was *ahem* slightly annoyed and beat hell out the guy in about 3 rounds.

Mind you - can't blame the challenger. That was always going to be his only shot at SRR - why not make it for a title as well? Even if a bit of a fail.

Anyway - the underlying message is - catchweights have been with us since the dawn of time and allow fighters of different weights to meet.

Belts being laid on the line for catchweight fights - now thats wrong. 151 is not lightmiddle, whatever Arum tells me...

by **oxring** Tue 10 May 2011, 8:54 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What is a pm......

Private message Truss. Click on the "you have umpteen new messages" button at the top.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 9:10 pm

Private message huh.....I thought he was going to tell me he loved me or something.....

Not some trivial stuff like that..

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Tue 10 May 2011, 9:17 pm

I don't mind catchweights as long as they aren't for titles. They give the chance of fighters from different weight classes fighting without one having to make a big jump up or the drain down.
They should open the availability of big fights up. Although I do think they've been used to give fighters an advantage over anotherwhen a catchweight isn't nescessary which is poor and gives them a bad reputation.

by Adam D Tue 10 May 2011, 9:39 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Private message huh.....I thought he was going to tell me he loved me or something.....

Not some trivial stuff like that..

Another PM for Trussman

by Scottrf Tue 10 May 2011, 9:41 pm

Hobo wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Private message huh.....I thought he was going to tell me he loved me or something.....

Not some trivial stuff like that..

Another PM for Trussman

Is anybody a fan of catchweight?? 27842-11

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 9:43 pm

by Lumbering_Jack Tue 10 May 2011, 10:30 pm

Hobo wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Private message huh.....I thought he was going to tell me he loved me or something.....

Not some trivial stuff like that..

Another PM for Trussman

Come on Hobo, the guy is joking...

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 10:46 pm

I'm to be taken to the Tower of London and tortured Lumbering.......

Tied up and forced to watch Johnny Nelson fights 24/7 Wink

by Lumbering_Jack Tue 10 May 2011, 10:48 pm

Execution would be preferable to the De Leon fight...

by **oxring** Tue 10 May 2011, 10:49 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm to be taken to the Tower of London and tortured Lumbering.......

Tied up and forced to watch Johnny Nelson fights 24/7

Still better than watching him commentate.

Or watching Sprott-Skelton

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 10 May 2011, 10:52 pm

execution instead of Deleon......

What the heck would you have instead of Nelson-James Warring?????

by Scottrf Tue 10 May 2011, 10:52 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:execution instead of Deleon......

What the heck would you have instead of Nelson-James Warring?????

But you've still watched all these fights.

Closet Nelson fan.

by Lumbering_Jack Tue 10 May 2011, 10:53 pm

One of the worst nights of my life that was Oxring. Did Skelton not get a title shot after that?

by **oxring** Tue 10 May 2011, 11:04 pm

Lumbering_Jack wrote:One of the worst nights of my life that was Oxring. Did Skelton not get a title shot after that?

Yeah - against Chagaev who whipped him - in another dull night of action. I remember staying up to watch it thinking - this is the guy who ended Harrison's career (I didn't think he'd ever get another shot, how wrong I was) against a former decent kickboxer - this fight should have fireworks. After the second round I was tired. After the 7th I wanted to fall asleep. After the 12th I couldn't understand whether I had just witnessed boxing or a piece of performance art entitled how to upset the viewing public.

And think - it was supposed to be Harrison

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Tue 10 May 2011, 11:57 pm

The benefit of catchweights here's some potential matches they could give us. This would stop fighters having to bulk up or drain down just meet in the middle these are good match ups and wouldn't need a title on the line.

110lbs- Segura vs Wojongkam
120lbs- Donaire vs Arce/Rigondeaux
124lbs- Gamboa vs Rigondeaux
137lbs- Judah vs Marquez/Guerrero/Rios
157lbs- Cotto vs Martinez
164lbs Martinez vs Ward/Froch

by D4thincarnation Tue 10 May 2011, 11:59 pm

prettyboykev wrote:The benefit of catchweights here's some potential matches they could give us. This would stop fighters having to bulk up or drain down just meet in the middle these are good match ups and wouldn't need a title on the line.

110lbs- Segura vs Wojongkam
120lbs- Donaire vs Arce/Rigondeaux
214lbs- Gamboa vs Rigondeaux
137lbs- Judah vs Marquez/Guerrero/Rios
157lbs- Cotto vs Martinez
164lbs Martinez vs Ward/Froch

Gamboa and Rigondeux would be an awful fight at that weight.

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Wed 11 May 2011, 12:03 am

I meant 124

by BALTIMORA Wed 11 May 2011, 12:49 am

Without a title on the line; fine.

With a title on the line: shouldn't be allowed.

by Rowley Wed 11 May 2011, 8:56 am

Not sure if this has already been said and can't be bothered to go through everyone elses posts. But personally I got the whole catchweight thing back in the day when there were fewer divisions and a wider weight gap between the divisions but in an age of 396 divisions and sometimes no more than a gram between the weights I really don't see the point.

However if we must have them I absolutely and wholeheartedly disagree with belts being on the line for catchweight fights. If a fight is for a title each fighter should be allowed to weigh in at that divisions limits, how can one compare acheivements across eras if fighters are not playing across a broadly level playing field. For me if a fighter cannot weigh in at anywhere he chooses within a weight class it is not a fight in that division and should not be a title fight and nothing will convince me otherwise on this particular point

by coxy0001 Wed 11 May 2011, 9:13 am

As above, no title on the line then fine

As the welter title doesn't have a limit of 144 or something, it's got a limit of 147.

And i don't see the point in catchweights as the party asking for them are generally trying to handicap the other party. If they didn't make any difference then why ask for them?

Never been a fan, if i had my way we'd get shot of every junior division below super feather as all that's seperating those divisions is a big brown turd before the weigh-in etc! Wink

by Imperial Ghosty Wed 11 May 2011, 10:07 am

prettyboykev wrote:The benefit of catchweights here's some potential matches they could give us. This would stop fighters having to bulk up or drain down just meet in the middle these are good match ups and wouldn't need a title on the line.

110lbs- Segura vs Wojongkam
120lbs- Donaire vs Arce/Rigondeaux
124lbs- Gamboa vs Rigondeaux
137lbs- Judah vs Marquez/Guerrero/Rios
157lbs- Cotto vs Martinez
164lbs Martinez vs Ward/Froch

If those were to be made they should be made at the highest weight at which one of them is competing at, why disadvantage Ward, Froch or Judah in order to make things easier for their opponent. Really is no need for catchweights any more

by wow_junky Wed 11 May 2011, 10:30 am

Don't like catchweights, but as I've said before I would rather see Pac v Cotto at 145lb rather than Pac - tune up at 147lb.

by BALTIMORA Wed 11 May 2011, 11:20 am

wow_junky wrote:Don't like catchweights, but as I've said before I would rather see Pac v Cotto at 145lb rather than Pac - tune up at 147lb.

With a title on the line I'd rather it hadn't happened. All it did was highlight how little Arum cares about his fighters.

by Scottrf Wed 11 May 2011, 11:23 am

BALTIMORA wrote:With a title on the line I'd rather it hadn't happened.

Really? I thought it was an entertaining fight.

by azania Wed 11 May 2011, 11:27 am

Catchweights for a title strap are a joke. You are deliberately weakening the other guy to get an advantage. What happened to beating the best at the best's natural weight.

As Atom said above, I cannot recognise SRL being a 5 weight champ seeing as the LH and SMW titles were fought in one fight. Ridiculous.

by wow_junky Wed 11 May 2011, 11:28 am

BALTIMORA wrote:
wow_junky wrote:Don't like catchweights, but as I've said before I would rather see Pac v Cotto at 145lb rather than Pac - tune up at 147lb.

With a title on the line I'd rather it hadn't happened. All it did was highlight how little Arum cares about his fighters.

Pacquiao - Cotto was one of the best fights possible in all of boxing, and you would rather it wasn't made because one of the 500000 belts available was on the line?

Boxers make fights, not the titles.

by Scottrf Wed 11 May 2011, 11:29 am

azania wrote:As Atom said above, I cannot recognise SRL being a 5 weight champ seeing as the LH and SMW titles were fought in one fight. Ridiculous.

That wasn't a catchweight.

by azania Wed 11 May 2011, 11:31 am

Scottrf wrote:
azania wrote:As Atom said above, I cannot recognise SRL being a 5 weight champ seeing as the LH and SMW titles were fought in one fight. Ridiculous.
That wasn't a catchweight.

I believe it was. LaLonde was the LHW champion and the fight was made at 168 with the LHW as well as the SMW belt up for grabs. In short LaLonde was fighting outside his natural weight hence catchweight.

by Sponsored content