The Founder Of Catchweights

[Dinamita85]

This is my 1st thread so be gentle.

The other day i was having a read of 4 kings while watchin a replay of the Ray Leonard special of Ringside that was shown last year, they mention his fights with Duran Hearn's Hagler Benitez etc and later on they mention the fight against Donny Lalonde , After abit of reading about the fight in general with Leonards super middleweight title on the line and lalondes light heavyweight title on the line, both making the supermiddle limit and then re-hydrating to light heavy and i thought , was this the first time in history there was ever a proper catchweight with Titles being allowed to change hands?

Im not a boxing historian so i dont know this for certain obviously which is why im putting it to the posters here, in this era where , Manny Pacquiao is slated for draining fighters to certain catchweights effectively weakening them and where floyd got abuse for not bothering to make the weight for the marquez fight, Did Leonard get a pass cos he was the golden boy of boxing at the time?

so my questions are really to help me improve my own knowledge.. what was and is the general view of the Leonard v Lalonde fight , was Leonard verbally abused for this contest at the time?

Was Leonard the 1st person to ever have a catchweight fight, if he wasnt who was and also if Leonard was shouldnt he really be to blame for all the farcical catchweights in this day and age.

[Seamus]

Didn't Henry Armstong have at least one of these?

[Dinamita85]

This is what im trying to find out mate...you hear loads in the early 1900 s of fighters jumping up weight divisions fitzsimons , armstrong , ketchel, robinson, but did any of them or anyone else fight for tow titles at 2 different weights at one time , and if leonard is the 1st is he responsible for these god awful catchweights that in a way ruin the sport.

[McGrain]

Hell no. Catchweights are as old as boxing, almost.

[The Kurgan]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Hell no. Catchweights are as old as boxing, almost.

Yes. In a sense, they precede weight divisions, in that people would set agreements on weights.

[Dinamita85]

how come modern fighters get slated for them so much then if they have essentially been around since boxing began?

[dyna]

Originally Posted by Dinamita85

how come modern fighters get slated for them so much then if they have essentially been around since boxing began?

Nostalgia glasses.

[McGrain]

It has nothing to do with nostalgia. As far as I can tell there is zero understanding of the history of catchweights and when you bring it up people tend to get upset and confused.

It's to do with the internet, anonymity, and the combination allowing people who hate certain boxers to whinge endlessly about anything negative they can associate with any fighters. Moved up in weight? Scare of X. Moved down in weight? Scared of Y. Catchweight? Wants an unfair advantage. Fights at home? Unfair advantage. Wants a certain kind of glove? What a coward!

Catchweight is just one of many completely made up things for fanboys and haters to whinge about.

[dyna]

Originally Posted by McGrain

It has nothing to do with nostalgia. As far as I can tell there is zero understanding of the history of catchweights and when you bring it up people tend to get upset and confused.

It's to do with the internet, anonymity, and the combination allowing people who hate certain boxers to whinge endlessly about anything negative they can associate with any fighters. Moved up in weight? Scare of X. Moved down in weight? Scared of Y. Catchweight? Wants an unfair advantage. Fights at home? Unfair advantage. Wants a certain kind of glove? What a coward!

Catchweight is just one of many completely made up things for fanboys and haters to whinge about.

People just like to whine about everything but tend to look at history more rose colored.

Also that girl in your avatar has a neck as long as Valuev his reach

[McGrain]

Well these people aren't looking at history at all. The opposite in fact. They are being careful NOT to look at history.

[kingfisher3]

old guys get stick for it too, look at nelsons v gans (at least from me)

[Unforgiven]

Actually the WBC did get a little bit "slated" for the Leonard-Lalonde thing.
Certainly some fans and boxing writers questioned why the WBC were sanctioning a fight for two weight titles at once.
Throwing in the VACANT super-middle title with Lalonde's light-heavy title seemed a bit cheap and gimmicky.

Well, everyone knew that is was because it so SRLeonard could do the historic 'five titles' thing.

Funnily though, the WBO came into existence a few days before the fight, and sanctioned Thomas Hearns v James Kinchen as for their 'vacant super-middle' title, so that's that.


I can't slate fighters for catch weights.
I think promoters and sanctioning bodies are the ones that can lose prestige from them.

It's ridiculous that Pacquiao can contest a vacant light-middleweight title having never fought at that weight AND THEN make it at 150 or whatever !
That makes him a "king" of the 154-pound class ?!!
It's clearly absurd.

Also, a fight like Dawson-Ward, the smaller champ should step up to the heavier division, imo. It makes more sense, it has more meaning, it's better for boxing.

[kingfisher3]

catchweight title fights always seemed a slightly twisted idea to me, if its not for a title i am not fussed, modern fighters dont need to chase opponents in the way early, particularly black fighters had to, basically agreeing to anything to make the fight.

[Dinamita85]

i must admit ive believed catchweights to be a more new agey thing, especially when you here people say , certain fightersin history would be spinning in his grave ..he fought fighter a - b - c all at there natural weights ... not draining them down to there weight etc.

kinda why i started this topic cos i was begin to believe it may have all been leonards fault.

btw nowt against leonard, it sounds like i have something against him, i dont his skills were wonderful and i love the guys charisma.

[Dinamita85]

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

Actually the WBC did get a little bit "slated" for the Leonard-Lalonde thing.
Certainly some fans and boxing writers questioned why the WBC were sanctioning a fight for two weight titles at once.
Throwing in the VACANT super-middle title with Lalonde's light-heavy title seemed a bit cheap and gimmicky.

Well, everyone knew that is was because it so SRLeonard could do the historic 'five titles' thing.

Funnily though, the WBO came into existence a few days before the fight, and sanctioned Thomas Hearns v James Kinchen as for their 'vacant super-middle' title, so that's that.


I can't slate fighters for catch weights.
I think promoters and sanctioning bodies are the ones that can lose prestige from them.

It's ridiculous that Pacquiao can contest a vacant light-middleweight title having never fought at that weight AND THEN make it at 150 or whatever !
That makes him a "king" of the 154-pound class ?!!
It's clearly absurd.

Also, a fight like Dawson-Ward, the smaller champ should step up to the heavier division, imo. It makes more sense, it has more meaning, it's better for boxing.

Thanks for that unforgiven , it was an informative read.

btw i completely agree with your opinion on ward v dawson and the pacman light middleweight fiasco.

Ward shoulda stepped up, suppose its also dawsons fault for agreeing to it, in regards to pacquiao he was gift wrapped that title , margs had done nothing to deserve being in another title fight, respect manny for all the challenges hes taken on but the margarito fight being for a title and cotto havings to make 144 145 whatever it was really dont sit well with me.