Controversial statements on boxing that you stand by...

Maybe its possible, but it would be hard to find evidence to prove it.

 

Only a theory, not like I'm saying it's a bad thing, but it's a bad thing for fighters who might want to stay consistently strong/durable throughout their careers (only a theory)

I think fighting at your natural weight is a better idea.

 

I think there's definitely some merit in it, definitely.

To me, it not only hurts their longevity but hastens a decline too.... more and more fighters go from being pretty much at their best to looking shot over a couple of fights.

Look at Williams, weight gaining, then cutting every fight.... his natural walk around weight is in the mid 150's, so just fight at 54 or 60. It's only recently he's quit the idea of making 147.

These days they try and do the weight too long, whereas in the past they'd move up without a thought..... alright the weigh-in was on the same day, but the gaps between weight divisions were bigger too.

Nobody gave a **** about being light welter or light middle champ until the late 80's.

It's the last couple of lbs that is the hardest to shift and does the most damage too. Sitting in a steam room with a rubber suit on to lose the best part of half a stone isn't healthy.

With the gaps being only small just move up and weigh in lighter. It's the weight on the night that really counts, except in ridiculous circumstances like Margarito.

 

And then on the other side of the argument you have people trying to prove that same day weigh ins are dangerous for a fighter during bout, increasing the chances of brain damage. All because a fighter possibly could not being fully hydrated come fight night.

But then the day before the fight weigh ins are dangerous to the opponent aswell. A light-weight putting on 20 pounds of weight over a 24 hour period, and then fighting an opponent who weighs a lot less could be dangerous. An example would be Gatti-Gamache, where it look like a 154 pounder against a lightweight.

 

This is exactly my thinking.

And it didn't matter whether a champion or challenger was half a stone under the limit. Just being more naturally in shape put both fighters on a more level playing field. Plenty of instances of 11 stone blokes winning the middleweight title for instance :good

 

I think its indisputable that 24 hour weigh-ins are safer from a brain trauma point of view.

 

Exactly. Obviously there are the odd brave guys who try to make a weight on fight day to have an advantage and get ****ed over.

But yep, there's still a risk to 24 hour weigh ins.

My whole rgument though, is only about career longevity. I think drastic weight cuts, facilitated by the 24 hr rule, can take years off a fighters career.

Especially considering the amount of fights you'd expect a fighter to get in before he calls it a day nowadays, far less than in yesteryear (obviously a pretty broad claim, but there's enough stuff out there that we're all aware of, I'm sure anyone reading this will get the gist :good)

Of course. But give it ten more years and see how many of the more recent guys are really punchy. Short term yes, but I'm not convinced long term yet.

As I keep saying, this isn't exclusive for everyone from the last 20 years (about that now ain't it?) but just a rough brainwave I've had over the past few years.

 

Yeah definitely.

What I'd like to see is more check weigh-ins, basically stopping a fighter from losing so much weight within (say) the last month or so before a fight.

Obviously this can't apply to journeymen who are sitting down for their tea when the call comes.

Maybe a rule on the maximum re-hydration too, it's not healthy putting on 15lbs in a day either, albeit not as bad as spending all day in a steam room then fighting later.

 

There are a few too many divisions, but its not a major problem. Just means a few are inevitably weaker and it dilutes the comp a little.

The weigh in situation is fine.

It's the ABC's and boxing politics that ruins boxing.

 

Thats my take on it. The weights could be better but its nowhere near the top of my list of "things wrong with boxing".

 

Probably more like 25 years, the WBC stripped Marvin Hagler for fighting Duran in a 15 rounder instead of a 12 rounder, as was their newly introduced rule. That was in 1983, but the rule probably came into effect widespread a few years later. Im just nit picking anyways:thumbsup

 

No because I agree

The multitude of commisions is the real problem

Some of those classes are currently & have been excellent, what would your personal favourite be?

 

I'm on about 24 hour weigh in rule, not 15 to 12 rounds, I'm sure the weight was later was it not? :think

 

I know you're asking Gaz, but if you mean the 'fake' weights, light fly :yep

 

Yup.