So the fight has been made...but why Cotto's title is on the line and not Pacquiao's?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by waltergaitan, Aug 3, 2009.


  1. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member

    79,438
    2,647
    Feb 1, 2007
  2. Holmesy

    Holmesy Interloper Full Member

    518
    0
    Oct 29, 2008
    It's just common sense. The divisions are there for safety. If there was no minimum weight then a 106lb fighter could legally fight a heavyweight.

    On that link you gave there is a maximum weight difference of between 3lbs (for weights up to bantamweight) and 12lbs (cruiserweight) and then no limit for the difference in weight between heavyweight fighters - heavyweight is the only division where you can give away more than 12lbs to your opponent.

    On the same link, it defines welterweight (for example) as OVER 140lbs to 147lbs.

    I did a page search for '163' to verify your numbers and found nothing. Where did you get those figures? Why would they have weight limits and then have small-print with different values?

    Some people may point to Roy Jones being 193lbs against Ruiz, but the Cruiserweight limit was 190lbs then, so 193lbs was heavyweight.
     
  3. Holmesy

    Holmesy Interloper Full Member

    518
    0
    Oct 29, 2008
    I see what's happened - you've read 'Weight Difference Allowance' as 'difference from the stated values' and I've read it as 'difference from the opponent's weight'. I've been wrong many times, but I think I'm right here.
     
  4. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member

    79,438
    2,647
    Feb 1, 2007
    i misunderstood the rules. I thought by weight difference they meant difference with the limits but obviously they mean between the fighters. I've seen for example a non-title WW fights where the fighters weigh in at 148 or 149 but they are still announced as WW fights so thats why i made that connection and misread it.

    so what happens if a fighter who weighs 176 fights a guy who weighs 199lb? is that fight not allowed? aren't both cruserweights?
     
  5. Scar

    Scar VIP Member

    76,131
    2,773
    Jul 20, 2004
    Because it's at the welterweight limit and above 140. This isn't the first time a fight like this happens.
     
  6. Holmesy

    Holmesy Interloper Full Member

    518
    0
    Oct 29, 2008
    I would have thought that was OK until I read those rules. Guess not, though.
     
  7. Sweet Pea Pacquiao

    Sweet Pea Pacquiao Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,294
    1
    Aug 25, 2004
    You guys are both right. You see prospects or contenders who aren't fighting in regional titles or title eliminators fight tune-ups at 2, 3, sometimes even 5 pounds over the weight limit and still have it be considered at the desired weight class--precisely because there is nothing on the line, and because both corners as well as the commission have agreed to terms.

    Obviously the rules are in place for safety precautions, but at the same time, the ultimate decision is in the hands of the presiding commission and ring doctor.

    To the thread starter, I hope he or she isn't on suicide watch. That was pretty embarrassing and a slap in the face not only to his/her fellow Pacquiao-haters, but to the sport of boxing as well.
     
  8. Scar

    Scar VIP Member

    76,131
    2,773
    Jul 20, 2004
    The man who's bringing the biggest fights in boxing and most exciting ones today is a disgrace to boxing?

    Freddy Roach who transformed a once one-dimensional "two punch" fighter into a multi dimensional extremely skilled fighter is a disgrace to boxing?

    It's these guys that CARRY boxing and bring excitement to it. You must be a real idiot saying something like that.

    This isn't the first time a catchweight fight happens with titles on the lines. Hagler/Leonard was at a catchweight with the undisputed middleweight titles ON the line and many other fights.

    Cotto wasn't forced to do nothing, Roach wanted the fight at 143, it's Cotto who said 145 or NOTHING even before Pac called him out. Cotto got what HE ASKED for.

    Fans like you are a disgrace to the sport.
     
  9. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member

    79,438
    2,647
    Feb 1, 2007
    well said