Catchweights: Agree or Disagree?

[RJJFan]

Mikey Garcia is now pursuing a fight with Juanma but at a CW. Do you agree with his stance? Do you agree with CWs in general?

[AnthonyW]

Catchweights - No issue.

Catchweights for belts - Just no.

[Cinderella Man]

Catchweights are always bullshit if you ask me. There's 17 weight classes now, ain't that enough? That shit has to stop somewhere, before clowns start telling each other to man up and move from their 165,6 pound class to fight the 166,2 pound champ.

[victor879]

Agree with Anthony.

No catch weight fights for titles. I think that is just bogus. You fight within the weight range the division dictates, period.

If you wanted 2 champions to meet in the middle for a non-title bout, again, I agree with Anthony and have no problem with it. That would be purely for the competition, not titles, and I would respect that.

In general practice though, I feel it should be avoided. There are plenty of weight classes, more than there used to be in fact, so there should be no reason to have a catchweight fight. Move up, or stay down. Very simple.

Back in the day, 130, 140, 154, 168 etc. were all "catch weights." They've gone from 8 to 17 weight classes. How many "catch weights" do we need?

[Uncle Rico]

Originally Posted by RJJFan

Mikey Garcia is now pursuing a fight with Juanma but at a CW. Do you agree with his stance? Do you agree with CWs in general?

If it connects two fighters -- to make a decent fight -- who otherwise can't fight each other, then there's nothing wrong with it. Catchweights have existed for decades.

[JohnnyDrama99]

Depends on the situation.....if a fighter who happens to be smaller but ultra talented decides that he wants to fight bigger men, then a catch weight is fine. It allows two competitors from different weight classes to meet on a common ground to compete against one another. When a title is on the line I think catch weights needs to have more requirments....like it has to be a champion vs a champion....the catch weight has to be closer to the wieght of the title that is on the line than the one that isn't....I really have no problems with catch weights if they are done in the right way.

[klion22]

Originally Posted by victor879

Agree with Anthony.

No catch weight fights for titles. I think that is just bogus. You fight within the weight range the division dictates, period.

If you wanted 2 champions to meet in the middle for a non-title bout, again, I agree with Anthony and have no problem with it. That would be purely for the competition, not titles, and I would respect that.

In general practice though, I feel it should be avoided. There are plenty of weight classes, more than there used to be in fact, so there should be no reason to have a catchweight fight. Move up, or stay down. Very simple.

Back in the day, 130, 140, 154, 168 etc. were all "catch weights." They've gone from 8 to 17 weight classes. How many "catch weights" do we need?

That's what catchweights do. You fight at or below the limit. If the champ is willing to go down a few lbs to meet the smaller challenger, why not?

I think too many people have Pac/DLH on their minds and think that all catchweights adversely affect a fighter.

[Hatesrats]

The the thing with Mikey is Garcia has said in many interviews that he has no intentions of moving up from his current weight division. (Yet)


A Catchweight Vs. JuanMa would be a "Superfight" I'd watch it.

[pound]

Originally Posted by AnthonyW

Catchweights - No issue.

Catchweights for belts - Just no.

This

[victor879]

Originally Posted by klion22

That's what catchweights do. You fight at or below the limit. If the champ is willing to go down a few lbs to meet the smaller challenger, why not?

I think too many people have Pac/DLH on their minds and think that all catchweights adversely affect a fighter.

Yes, but because one guy can only get as high as 164, is no reason to keep the other guy from weighing 168.

The 'range' is 160.1 to 168. Closing that range when challenging for a title is ridiculous and should never be allowed. You fight the 'Champ' at HIS weight.

Pac/DLH was a non-title bout AT 147.

[AnthonyW]

Originally Posted by klion22

That's what catchweights do. You fight at or below the limit. If the champ is willing to go down a few lbs to meet the smaller challenger, why not?

I think too many people have Pac/DLH on their minds and think that all catchweights adversely affect a fighter.

But the problem with catchweights that have titles on the line is this. For example the middleweight belt, the range limit is 154lbs-160lbs, catchweights restrict said boxer to come in at the maximum weight limit that the belt allows. None of this, but it's within the limit, it's only the maximum limit that has changed, well, what is the point in having that limit for the belt in the first place? Let's have a Middleweight title bout with a maximum weight limit of 154.1lbs, it's within the range limit, right?

Again, I have no issues with catchweights, but titles should not even come in to negotiations, and the organisations themselves should not entertain them.

[Miguel]

As 1 or 2 others have said.

Catchweights are fine for non-championship bouts, up to the 2 fighters involved how they want to get it on.

If you're fighting for the welterweight championship then you are allowed by definition to go up to 147 - catchweights in this instance are bulls**t and should not be allowed

[KO KIDD]

Juanma was 128 for his last fight, your telling me he cant just fight at 126

[Miguel]

Originally Posted by klion22

I think too many people have Pac/DLH on their minds and think that all catchweights adversely affect a fighter.

Pac DLH was NOT a catchweight - it was an agreed welterweight bout, 147 limit. De La Hoya came down to WW from LMW and Pac went up from LW to WW.

Catchweight was Cotto v Pac (145), Marg V Pac (151) - DLH V Pac was a legitimate welterweight fight

[IntentionalButt]

Strongly disagree. Fuck the situation.

Move up, or move down. Pretty simple.