Should there be an end to catch weights regarding PACMAN??

No offence, but that's bull****.

Pac IS better than Cotto, but this is something that's not based on the result of this fight, but of the abilities both fighters have shown up to this point. If Pac loses, he's still clearly a better fighter than Cotto.

And nothing is made equal here, Cotto would be more comfortable at 147 than 143. Pacquiao would be more comfortable at a lighter weight than 143. So basically a big part of what could decide this fight is who is suffering more at this unnatural weight? And that, under NO circumstances should be a factor in any supposedly level field.

 

I am talking about the possible result of a hypothetical fight. Assuming that they agree to fight at a catchweight which was done in the case of dela Hoya Hopkins, Pavlik-Taylor, etc., the winner is the better fighter. If Pac wins, he is the better fighter. If Cotto wins, he is the better fighter. Obviously, isn't it? But if they fight at a weight advantageous to one fighter, you cannot determine who is the better fighter. They should therefore agree to fight at an agreed contracted weight.

 

if pac wants to fight cotto then cotto is a welterweight so the fight limit should be 147 why cotto has to lose extra weight is just pac`s people just trying to get an edge cotto should say **** you ,you want my tittle come get it

 

i am not saying there is anything wrong with catchweight fights i just think cotto`s people should give there man his best chance

 

The fight is disadvantageous to BOTH fighters, and whoever suffers the least has a disproportionate over the other, which is just plain wrong. It's the same with every catchweight - Hopkins/Pavlik is the best example of this.

And no, one fight between two men does NOT decide the better fighter outright. Take Paul Williams vs. Quintana, which is one of millions of examples. Quintana won, but are do you actually think Quintana is better than Williams? What about any number of "Fighter A beats Fighter B, Fighter B beats C, Fighter C beats A" scenarios. If fighter A beat B, it means he's better than him, despite the fact Fighter B beat the man who beat Fighter A?
It's closer to deciding who was better on the night, but that's about it.

And with catchweights, it doesn't even totally decide that, because if Fighter A (who is massively disadvantaged at the weights) give Fighter B (who is less disadvantaged) hell, then Fighter A put up the better performance, even if Fighter B won.

 

I had less against them when there were less weight divisions. You can't advocate catchweights and complain about too many weight divisions.

 

yes true but as cotto`s tittle will be at stake then if he weighs in at 147 that is fine, if pac wants to weigh 142 thats fine too

 

I bitched like never before when that fight was made! I was MUCH more pissed then than I am now. That fight was distortion personified.

And catchweights are an easy way for fights to be made, but they end up with distorted results due to the supposedly "levelling out" of the playing field and end up proving nothing. This fight will prove nothing at all. This fight means more money for everyone concerned, so of course they are to want it. I don't blame anyone concerned on that front. But as far as boxing is concerned, it's not good for it.

 

yeah, i just feel if you are going want someones tittle have the balls fight them at there normal fight weight