With the Marquis of Queenberry setting the rules, England also set the weights in boxing. Of course, one of our many quirks as a nation is that we measure weight primarily in stones, which are units of 14lbs. Therefore, the original eight weights sort of took their lead from this with fly (112lbs - 8x14) and feather (126lbs - 9x14) setting the tone. What might have happened if the rules had been set elsewhere and so original weight classes wouldn't have taken their leads from stones but gone in more usual increments divisible by 5 or 10? Would it be reasonable to assume that flyweight would therefore have been limited to 110lbs rather than the rather arbitrary 112? Bantam 120lbs instead of 118? Feather 130? Light 140? Welter 150? Middle 165? LHW 180 and heavy anything above? If you're still with me, are there any figures in boxing history whose standing rises/falls with these different weight limits? For example, if the first Leonard v Hearns fight had had a 150lb weight limit, does not having to boil those extra three lbs off give Tommy the strength to get over the line? Too big to make welter, how do the careers of Hagler and Monzon pan out? Neither rose above 160 in their careers. Do they get through similarly long reigns taking on men routinely bigger than them? Does Arguello stay at feather a long time and become the division's greatest champ? Any thoughts, anyone?
They should change them regardless. What with people being bigger now and all that. Honestly, the UFC has it about right. Fly: 125 Bantam: 135 Feather: 145 Light: 155 Welter: 170 Middle: 185 Lt. Heavy: 205 Heavy: Under 265
Packey McFarland would have been lightweight champion if the division had been at 135 instead of at 133
