What are your acceptable terms for a catchweight

Several threads have turned into debates on catchweights. I'll admit to being one of the posters involved in those debates and thought it would be nice to get an understanding of everybody's views.

Here are my standards:
1. No belts on the line -- catchweight is perfectly fine. I just hope both fighters can make the weight and still have the fight be competitive.

2. Belt(s) on the line -- the champion should be allowed to fight at his full weight limit. No more, no less. He has the belt(s) and has earned that right.

Yes, I'm old school in the fact that I still honor championships more than some other guys. However, my standards are simple and don't waver.

What are yours?

 

That's pretty much the nail on the head. :yep

 

I kinda figured we would agree.

 

If it's reasonable and both parties agree. The limits of each division aren't 'magic' numbers that state fighting there means they are at their best. If more and more guys are going to entertain the idea of a catchweight, then that's on them. Don't agree to a weight you cannot make. Simple as that.

 

If your not healthy at the weight, don't agree to fight at it.

 

How about a champ requesting to defend his belt at a cw against a divisional challenger, where does that fall? How about a 6lb rehydration limit, to boot? What if the challenger is not top 20 rated, with 1 working eye?

 

I can't argue with the logic of don't sign up for a weight you can't make and be healthy. The key part, to me, is "healthy." Sometimes that extra couple of pounds can really impact performance.

 

Cotto Pacqiuao was a disgraceful catchweight seeing that Pac Man was capable of fighting at LMW.

Hopkins Hoya catchweight made some sense, because Hoya didn't belong at MW.

 

I've been or record as stating that Cotto should have fought Margo at the full 154. (In this case, though, the demand came from the champion, not the challenger which is not the norm.) I'm a lot of things, but a hypocrite is not one of them.

So, instead of trying to throw stones, why don't you state your policies? Or do they waver according to who is fighting?

 

No belt? Thats fine, Its just a show for the fans.

With a belt on the line? Stick to the weight limits. Either there are Weight Classes in boxing which must be stuck to for championship bouts, or scrap them all together.


Personally, I think stick to a weight you are both comfortable at, if both guys dont want to fight at the limit, dont fight for the belt.

 

And sadly we are seeing guys SELL that advantage to get a shot at the bigger $$

In some cases it's almost as good as selling an L :deal

 

History of some old catchweight fights:-

http://roberto00.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/catch-22-a-history-of-boxing-catchweight-fights/

 

*The fighters should be separated by at least 2 weight divisions. If the opponent is only in the next weight class up, move up the traditional way and fight him like a real champ would. Catchweighting someone who is just one division higher is a cheap way to win the belt.

Example of "good" catchweight for this criterion - Jones vs Trinidad
Example of "shitty catchweights against this criterion - emmanroid vs Cotto(e) and Oscar vs Bernard


*Catchweighting is rule bending. Messing with these rules can only be justified if there's a great demand for this fight to happen. Is it a superfight between two elites?

Example of "good" catchweight for this criterion - Jones vs Trinidad
Example of "shitty" catchweight against this criterion - emmanroid vs margo(e)

 

Pretty much how I feel.

Good post!:good

 

Cotto(e)'s CW in the margo(e) rematch was very silly, but I suppose he was entitled to some advantage after what happened to him the first time.