catchweights

[dan28uk]

Anyone else feel the same as me about catchweights and titles being on the line im not the biggest fan of catchweights anyway but how can titles be on the line like cottos middleweight title. I seem to remember cotto vs paquiao being at 145 as well.

[handsofstone]

I don't mind catchweights in non title fights but no way should titles be on the line,surely the ABC's have rules and regulations that stipulate weight limits so shame on them for allowing it

I'm not sure if all 4 major bodies are guilty but for instance if Geale came in at 159 for the Cotto fight but the fight went ahead,would he be ineligible to win the MW title despite being a pound under the limit?

Bonkers scenario, as far as I'm aware its only really a concern in the States,hopefully its soon stubbed out

[handsofstone]

The worst thing about them in title fights is the fact a boxer can spend his whole fledging career at a certain weight but they are made to come in drained for their shot at the title,hardly fair is it,I doubt the lesser names like Lee Selby or Grigory Drozd would get away with doing it

[Badhusker]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

[MachoTime]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

What do you think about Mayweather's catchweight vs. Canelo..?

[handsofstone]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

What's the CW for Broner-Porter??

[Ricky_]

Catchweights are a joke.

It's understandable to a certain extent to see a guy making a big jump up in weight request one to even the playing field a bit but they are getting ridiculous now. Floyd vs Canelo was the most disgusting one in recent history, having already competed at the weight on a few occassions before, and recognised champ, the only singular purpose of his cw stipulation was to weaken and drain his opponent. As mentioned above, shame on the comissions for allowing them.

[Shirow]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

What's the CW for Broner-Porter??

It's 144lbs.

In regards to Cotto v Geale, the WBC stated that their weight limit is 160 and as long as both fighters weigh in at or below that the the belt is up for grabs. Any other contractual agreement regarding weight between the fighters is between themselves. So you can't ask the sanctioning bodies to do much more. If they insisted on no below weight agreements for title fights i'm sure the camps would just try to keep it quiet.

Catchweights should only be used where a huge but non-title fight can only happen that way. Like Pacquaio De La Hoya. These fights will be tainted by the catchweight but if the fight is big enough and that is the only way it can possibly happen that is the only excuse for them.

[Ricky_]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

What's the CW for Broner-Porter??

It's 144lbs.

In regards to Cotto v Geale, the WBC stated that their weight limit is 160 and as long as both fighters weigh in at or below that the the belt is up for grabs. Any other contractual agreement regarding weight between the fighters is between themselves. So you can't ask the sanctioning bodies to do much more. If they insisted on no below weight agreements for title fights i'm sure the camps would just try to keep it quiet.

Catchweights should only be used where a huge but non-title fight can only happen that way. Like Pacquaio De La Hoya. These fights will be tainted by the catchweight but if the fight is big enough and that is the only way it can possibly happen that is the only excuse for them.

Pac vs DeLaHoya wasn't a catchweight.

[dan28uk]

I thought paquiao vs de la hoya was at 147 and was clearly struggling getting down.

[baron_otto]

Like most others I don't like catch weight. If there were fewer divisions with bigger differences between them I might be more sympathetic but catchweight fights in divisions that are only a few pounds apart is silly. Especially for title fights. Just choose a weight and follow the normal rules.

[Freedom2013]

I don't like Broner's demanding Porter fight him at a catch weight.

Hopefully Porter will knock him out, but I have a feeling those few pounds will weaken Porter just enough to enable Broner to win.

[diddy]

Not JUST at a catchweight but also with a rehydration clause. An absolute joke. Watch Broner STILL lose.

[Badhusker]

Floyd's catchweight with Canelo sucked just like the rest of them.

Pac vs DLH WAS a catchweight, fought at the welterweight limit. They met in between the weights that they were fighting at previously.

YES, chickenshit Broner demanded a catchweight of 144, along with a rehydration clause of 10 lbs or 160, can't remember. I hope Porter gives him a beating. Khan would have fought Broner but didn't want the catchweight. Props to Khan for turning him down.

[Shirow]

What's the CW for Broner-Porter??

It's 144lbs.

In regards to Cotto v Geale, the WBC stated that their weight limit is 160 and as long as both fighters weigh in at or below that the the belt is up for grabs. Any other contractual agreement regarding weight between the fighters is between themselves. So you can't ask the sanctioning bodies to do much more. If they insisted on no below weight agreements for title fights i'm sure the camps would just try to keep it quiet.

Catchweights should only be used where a huge but non-title fight can only happen that way. Like Pacquaio De La Hoya. These fights will be tainted by the catchweight but if the fight is big enough and that is the only way it can possibly happen that is the only excuse for them.

Pac vs DeLaHoya wasn't a catchweight.

My mistake! I was going from memory and remembered Oscar losing too much weight too early and confused it with the Margarito fight (which didn't need a catchweight). If Pac v DLH didn't require a catchweight i don't think there can be a good case for any fight really needing one.

[Ricky_]

Pac vs DLH WAS a catchweight

No, it really wasn't.

[Ricky_]

My mistake! I was going from memory and remembered Oscar losing too much weight too early and confused it with the Margarito fight (which didn't need a catchweight). If Pac v DLH didn't require a catchweight i don't think there can be a good case for any fight really needing one.

Pac would have requested a catchweight if he could have, he was jumping 2 weight classes to meet a guy 3 weight's above him. He wasn't the draw though, he was very much the B-side, so the fight was on Oscar's terms.

I can see the need for catchweight's on some occasions, the excessive use of duiretics to gain a weight advantage has created some pretty big gulf's in weight and smaller guys moving up to fight can be forgiven sometimes for trying to claw a bit of that weight back.

I'd rather they panned them completely though and adopted a more stringent weight rules like the WBC 60-day & 30-day weigh-ins to prevent excessive weight draining and rehydration, which would force guys to fight at a more natural weight class if they are too big. Chavez Jnr at Middleweight for instance, no way should a guy be weighing over 180lb in a middleweight fight.

[Badhusker]

Pac vs DLH WAS a catchweight

No, it really wasn't.

Yes, it really was. Look up the definition of what a catchweight is, and get back to me.

[Ricky_]

Pac vs DLH WAS a catchweight

No, it really wasn't.

Yes, it really was. Look up the definition of what a catchweight is, and get back to me.

"A catch weight is a term used in combat sports such as boxing and mixed martial arts to describe a weight limit for a fight that does not fall in line with the traditional limits for weight classes."

Pacquiao vs Delahoya was a Weltereight fight.

[Badhusker]

I'm not arguing that it was a welterweight fight. A catch weight is when they agree on that is in between their normal fighting weights.

[Ricky_]

I'm not arguing that it was a welterweight fight. A catch weight is when they agree on that is in between their normal fighting weights.

No, a cw is when fighters contractually agree a weight that isn't an official weight class limit, i.e 144 or 152.

Pac vs Oscar and Floyd vs Hatton don't constitute catchweights. They were faught at official limits.

[KBB]

Catchweights suck, no matter how you spin it. All news media sources should call it "weight draining handicaps". It allows boxers on the A video to gain an unfair advantage. There are enough weight classes. If fighters don't have the balls to fight at the weight limits they should pack up and quit.

Broner doing it to porter is another joke catchweight fight. It's bad for boxing, and definitely should not be allowed. Big $$$ makes it hard to turn down, I know.

Example headline:
"Broner has forced a weight draining handicap on Porter. Or Broner is afraid to fight Porter at 147."

yes CWs aren't necessarily fair when trying to claim a belt/title but if the Challenger or "B" side agree and say something like I will fight him at 143 when the fight is supposed to be at 147 and all parties agree then if they do not have a problem with it, why should we??

I think certain fighters should keep their mouths closed if they are going to take a CW fight for the simple idea of either trying to make money or get a title, if the case is being weight drained then that fighter should move up in weight or stay at his own class and fight someone else who isn't trying to drain them.

Manny the Catchweight King of Boxing was right to drain everyone he faced because they were either desperate enough to take the fight to make money knowing they had no chance of winning a title or honestly thought that they'd win even while being drained. Personally I think all fighters should turn down CW fights no matter what is being offered but we all know how greedy fighters are so it is no surprise that we will continue to see them.

[Pureist]

No problem with catch weights if everyone arees, rehydration limits is what I don't agree with

[Badhusker]

I'm not arguing that it was a welterweight fight. A catch weight is when they agree on that is in between their normal fighting weights.

No, a cw is when fighters contractually agree a weight that isn't an official weight class limit, i.e 144 or 152.

Pac vs Oscar and Floyd vs Hatton don't constitute catchweights. They were faught at official limits.

A catchweight is a compromise weight. It doesn't matter if it is at a regular weight. Do some research dumb fuk. Arguing with an idiot.

[punchoutsb]

I'm not arguing that it was a welterweight fight. A catch weight is when they agree on that is in between their normal fighting weights.

No, a cw is when fighters contractually agree a weight that isn't an official weight class limit, i.e 144 or 152.

Pac vs Oscar and Floyd vs Hatton don't constitute catchweights. They were faught at official limits.

A catchweight is a compromise weight. It doesn't matter if it is at a regular weight. Do some research dumb fuk. Arguing with an idiot.

You're both kind of right, IMO.

If a 154 and a 140 agree to fight at Welterweight, that's not a catchweight, it's a Welterweight fight.

If a 154 and a 140 agree to fight at 145, that's a catchweight because it's a special weight within a division.

So yes, it is a compromise weight, but only if it does not fall within a division regardless of whether either of the participants fight in that division or not.

Unless it's a title fight...then anything other than the upper limit is a catchweight.