Question #1 - For older bouts, how is it determined which bout records list weight divisions and which ones don't?
Question #2 - Is the aim to list a weight division for every bout if it is known? Many bouts in the database have no weight division listed. I have noticed that older bouts from the UK are much more likely to have weight divisions listed than bouts from the US.
I think the aim should be to list the weight class of every bout even if the bout takes at catchweights. If a lightweight meets a welterweight for example, its a welterweight bout.
Question #3- Is the aim to apply the modern weight divisions to bouts that pre-date the modern weight divisions? Or to cite the weight class of the bout as it would have been cited at the time it occurred? It seems to me many of the older bouts from Australia cite bouts occurring in weight divisions like superlight and superwelter and even supermiddle even before those weight classes were established, but bouts from US from the same period are rarely cited as being contested in these weight divisions, if the weight division are cited at all.
On this question I lean toward citing the bouts in the weight division as it would have been cited at the time it occurred, but can see some strong arguments for using the modern weight divisions and applying them to older bouts.
Question #4- Should there be a consistent policy regarding how older bout's weight divisions are cited in the database?
The answer is clearly yes. What the consitent policy ought to be, sould make for an interesting discussion.
Weight Divisions
Re: Weight Divisions
Unless it is a title fight you are asking how long is a piece of string. No boxer makes the limit of the division he is campaigning in unless it is for a title fight. Some try to keep within 2 or 3 pounds of the limit, some may be several pounds over. If the weigh in is on the day of the fight some may be as much as a whole stone over.
-
josesantiago98
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 11:37
Re: Weight Divisions
There is some truth to what you say, but for the majority of non-heavyweight & non-title fights there is a contracted weight and a weigh in.
The question I posed was more about Boxrec, than boxing itself. How should the weight divisions of bouts be listed in the Boxrec database? Based on your reply, one might conclude Boxrec should only indicate the weight division for title bouts and not indicate the weight class of other bouts. Right now, that is not how the older bouts are listed. Some bouts include an indication of weight class, many others do not. The ones that do list weight class, do not appear to use a consistent criteria for determining the weight class. From a documenting boxing history point of view, it would be nice to have consistency.
The question I posed was more about Boxrec, than boxing itself. How should the weight divisions of bouts be listed in the Boxrec database? Based on your reply, one might conclude Boxrec should only indicate the weight division for title bouts and not indicate the weight class of other bouts. Right now, that is not how the older bouts are listed. Some bouts include an indication of weight class, many others do not. The ones that do list weight class, do not appear to use a consistent criteria for determining the weight class. From a documenting boxing history point of view, it would be nice to have consistency.
Re: Weight Divisions
There is no consistency to be had, for example...
- A bout might be reported as a Welterweight contest but we have no idea what the actual weights were.
- A boxer might be reported weighing in @ 144 lb, is he fighting a welterweight @ 149lb and over drained himself or is he fighting a super light @ 139 lb and came in comfortable.
- A boxer might be reported weighing in @ 144 lb the day before and 156 lb on the night, different commissions would assign different divisions to that fight.
-
josesantiago98
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 80
- Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 11:37
Re: Weight Divisions
I understand your points.
There is a possibility that the weight division of a bout can be reported inaccurately when the boxers actual weights are not known/available to corroborate.
Boxers weights can fluctuate and their condition (especially their level of hydration) can exaggerate these fluctuations.
Boxers can rehydrate significantly between the weigh in and the opening bell.
All three points are correct. There is no consistency to be had in a fighter's weight and there is no way of knowing how much a combatant may have gamed the scale through dehydration. Nonetheless norms regarding fighters weights can be, and have usually been in place throughout boxing history. Yes the norms have changed over the years, but they have always existed, because without weight divisions boxing would only barely exist. We would only have heavyweights and not much else.
A case that I recall that reinforces your last two points was the non-title 10 round bout between Arturo Gatti and Joey Gamache. Gatti weight 140.5 lbs, Gamache 140 lbs. Gatti rehydrated 19 pounds between the weigh in and fight time and nearly killed the much smaller Gamache. That's boxing and weigh ins the before the fight. Boxrec lists the bout having been contested at welterweight. I presume because Gatti exceed the superlightweight limit of 140 lbs. If Gatti had weighed in at 140 instead of 140.5, I am fairly sure that the bout would be listed as having been contested in the superlightweight division.
In Gamache's previous bout he weighed in at 149 lbs, his opponent, Craig Houk, at 155 lbs. The bout is listed as a middleweight bout in the Boxrec database, I surmise because one of the two contestants did not make the superwelterweight limit of 154 lbs so it was listed at the next higher weight class, middleweight. There is consistency in how boxrec lists the weight division of these two bouts. The criteria that is used to determine the weight class for these two bouts, is clear to see, easy to determine and can be considered consistent. The weight division listed for both of these bouts is the weight division of the heaviest contestant, even if it is only a pound or even half a pound over the limit of the lower weight class.
Rewind Gamache's record back to his third to last bout against Jerry Smith. Weights were Gamache 157lbs. and Smith 150lbs. By the above criteria, one would expect the bout to be listed as a middleweight bout. WRONG! Boxrec lists it as, "Can you believe it", Super Lightweight? This does not make sense to me. Does it make sense to anybody else?
All I am saying is that Boxrec, as the modern world's leading source of boxing records, should strive to apply consistent criteria to the weight division of the bout records it reports and archives. If the criteria used from one fight record to the next is not consistent then why even include the weight division in the fight record at all, Instead we can all just shrug our shoulders and say we don't know the weight division of any bout..
There is a possibility that the weight division of a bout can be reported inaccurately when the boxers actual weights are not known/available to corroborate.
Boxers weights can fluctuate and their condition (especially their level of hydration) can exaggerate these fluctuations.
Boxers can rehydrate significantly between the weigh in and the opening bell.
All three points are correct. There is no consistency to be had in a fighter's weight and there is no way of knowing how much a combatant may have gamed the scale through dehydration. Nonetheless norms regarding fighters weights can be, and have usually been in place throughout boxing history. Yes the norms have changed over the years, but they have always existed, because without weight divisions boxing would only barely exist. We would only have heavyweights and not much else.
A case that I recall that reinforces your last two points was the non-title 10 round bout between Arturo Gatti and Joey Gamache. Gatti weight 140.5 lbs, Gamache 140 lbs. Gatti rehydrated 19 pounds between the weigh in and fight time and nearly killed the much smaller Gamache. That's boxing and weigh ins the before the fight. Boxrec lists the bout having been contested at welterweight. I presume because Gatti exceed the superlightweight limit of 140 lbs. If Gatti had weighed in at 140 instead of 140.5, I am fairly sure that the bout would be listed as having been contested in the superlightweight division.
In Gamache's previous bout he weighed in at 149 lbs, his opponent, Craig Houk, at 155 lbs. The bout is listed as a middleweight bout in the Boxrec database, I surmise because one of the two contestants did not make the superwelterweight limit of 154 lbs so it was listed at the next higher weight class, middleweight. There is consistency in how boxrec lists the weight division of these two bouts. The criteria that is used to determine the weight class for these two bouts, is clear to see, easy to determine and can be considered consistent. The weight division listed for both of these bouts is the weight division of the heaviest contestant, even if it is only a pound or even half a pound over the limit of the lower weight class.
Rewind Gamache's record back to his third to last bout against Jerry Smith. Weights were Gamache 157lbs. and Smith 150lbs. By the above criteria, one would expect the bout to be listed as a middleweight bout. WRONG! Boxrec lists it as, "Can you believe it", Super Lightweight? This does not make sense to me. Does it make sense to anybody else?
All I am saying is that Boxrec, as the modern world's leading source of boxing records, should strive to apply consistent criteria to the weight division of the bout records it reports and archives. If the criteria used from one fight record to the next is not consistent then why even include the weight division in the fight record at all, Instead we can all just shrug our shoulders and say we don't know the weight division of any bout..