Do you think it's time for boxing to no longer have catchweights ?

Well I prefer title fights to be at the weight limit but I don't know of any way to stop catchweight fights.

They've always been part of boxing. If you have the negotiating leverage (Pacquiao, DLH, Leonard, etc...) you can demand it and most opponents will agree because they want the big fight. I don't know how you can stop catchweight fights, it's a contractual issue.

 

In title fights I do.

 

Actually you can, by not buying or watching the fight.

 

Well yeah, I guess that's the way.

 

I don't mind catchweights, but like people have said...if you are going to fight for a title, let the champion or your opposition come in within the weight class range were they feel most comfortable.

 

Like i said on the other thread, if no title is on the line, then i have no problem with it.

 

Then there would probably have to be some sort of ring tragedy, or monetary factors.

It went from 15 rounds to 12 rounds for either of 2 reasons (or both)

1) Easier to fight 12 rounds + intros + commercials + interviews in one hour on network TV than 15 rounds

2) The Ray Mancini-Duk Koo Kim tragedy.


Boxing also went from same day weigh-ins to day before weigh-ins for either of 2 reasons (or both).

1) Money lost from the aborted Michael Spinks-Eddie M. Muhammad rematch

2) The Ray Mancini-Duk Koo Kim tragedy.


Title fights should be at the weight limit IMO, but how many guys coming down to meet a catchweight have seemed to really be weakened by it? The most I can think of is Manny Pacquiao-Oscar De La Hoya, a non-title bout at the WW limit. For other fights, the bigger guys moving down haven't seemed to be affected by the weight loss.

When there's no loss of money and no ring tragedies that brings bad press, why would the powers that be give a ****? Fairness in the sport? Diluted titles? I don't think that's enough motivation for people to change the rules.

 

Then there would probably have to be some sort of ring tragedy, or monetary factors.

It went from 15 rounds to 12 rounds for either of 2 reasons (or both)

1) Easier to fight 12 rounds + intros + commercials + interviews in one hour on network TV than 15 rounds

2) The Ray Mancini-Duk Koo Kim tragedy.


Boxing also went from same day weigh-ins to day before weigh-ins for either of 2 reasons (or both).

1) Money lost from the aborted Michael Spinks-Eddie M. Muhammad rematch

2) The Ray Mancini-Duk Koo Kim tragedy.


Title fights should be at the weight limit IMO, but how many guys coming down to meet a catchweight have seemed to really be weakened by it? The most I can think of is Manny Pacquiao-Oscar De La Hoya, a non-title bout at the WW limit. For other fights, the bigger guys moving down haven't seemed to be affected by the weight loss.

When there's no loss of money and no ring tragedies that brings bad press, why would the powers that be give a ****?

 

Agreed.

 

**** catchweights.

 

There are catchweights all over the place, they are called Super and Jr. Divisions. We don't need anymore. Imagine if 147 actually had all the boxers within the old welterweight weight limit inhabiting it. Same with Heavyweight, Light Heavyweight, Middleweight, Lightweight, Featherweight, etc.

 

its ok for pac to weigh in at 148 but he ant then make margo come in at 150. if its too much of advantage fight the smaller guys

 

Tell me if I'm wrong, but did they stop to make 15 rounds fights because round 13 to 15 were the round with the most concussion and very dangerous injuries like that?