How would boxing have been effected if bridgerweight had been introduced at some point in the past?

225.

 

It would be a great way to replace CW.

 

Cruiser was an infinitely better idea than Bridger. No need for this one.

 

I disagree. Great cruisers are not great fighters, but great fighters can be great cruisers.

Like fingers and thumbs.

 

I don't exactly follow what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that all the great fighters at Cruiser weren't Cruisers (wrong)? Or that all the great fighters at Cruiser- Weren't great (still wrong)?

If Holyfield retired after Cruiserweight, he'd be an ATG in the weight, the same goes for Usyk- Who was at his best before the move up. But beyond that, you also have men like De Leon, Briedis, whoever. There's tons of men who are beautiful fighters but just get glossed over because they're at Cruiser.

Statements like this just make it seem like you haven't watched anything at Cruiserweight.

 

Then let's leave it there.

 

I'm saying neither of those two things tbh. You've misunderstood my post.

 

Then what're you saying?

 

I'm saying that in the storied history of the Cruiserweight division there are precisely two boxers who would be considered great fighters.

Holyfield and Usyk.

Neither of those two required the existence of fhe Cruiserweight division to become great. Had it not existed both would still have been greats.

Conversely fighters who have only had success in the division, such as Haye, Nelson, De Leon, Jirov etc are not considered to be great fighters.

Basically division itself just waters down talent because it's either people who should make LHW, or should fight at HW. Those who have become great have become great in spite of the division, not because of the division.

 

People would be done crying about it.

 

That's just wrong. This seems like an excuse just to write off a whole division.

"Neither of those two required the existence of fhe Cruiserweight division to become great." That's an unfounded claim with no evidence to back it- And more evidence to disprove it if anything. Usyk was at his best at Cruiserweight, and started to decline as he moved to Heavyweight, and Holyfield had to vastly improve on his experience at Cruiser to survive amongst the Heavyweights. There's no telling how badly these two would be affected by starting at Heavyweight.

Not considered to be great fighters by who? Of what authority is this claim made?

Nobody becomes great "because of the division", it's on your skill and talent to make this happen. Cruiserweight makes the "small heavyweight" issue that the division had a non factor- Where instead of sub 200 lbers facing men who could handle guys above 240, there's a division for the gap in size between Light Heavyweight and Heavyweight. I don't know why you even care about how the division "waters down talent" if none of the guys who fought there are great in your opinion.

 

Again you're totally missing the context. It makes it difficult to have conversations when someone is starting from such a defensive position.

Let me set it out for you.

The OP asked how would it have affected fighters careers had bridgerweight come into existence earlier.

I said it wouldn't really be relevant as bringing cruiserweight in hasnt made much difference.

The reason it hasn't made much difficult because those fighters who went on to become great, would have done some without the division ever existing.

Let's try some flipped learning here.

Imagine a world with no cruiserweight division, ok it's gone. You fight ay 175 or you fight at HW.

1) Do you think Holyfield and Usyk would still have gone on to become greater fighters?

2) Do you think there's anyone apart from those two, that you consider to be a great fighter, that would never become great without the division existing?

I've been a bigger fan of the cruiserweight division than you ever have. I've watched more cruiserweight fights than you ever have. But tell me any fighters who would not become great because the division never existed.