BoxRec

It's not a claim, it's a fact. Google it dumb ass.

Ossyrules wrote:do me a favour! There's 6 or 7 links posted have you tried them?

Unless I’m missing something, which I guess is easy to do, then only the BoxRec link contains any reference to the 164lbs catchweight, but unfortunately, the same claim isn’t supported with evidence… and the BoxRec notes can be modified by literally anyone. I could remove that note myself if I wanted to.

SaadOffTheDeck claimed that Sugar Ray made Tommy Hearns “boil down” to 162lbs, but if the catchweight stipulation was actually 164lbs… with the Hitman weighing 159½lbs, 160lbs and 165½lbs for the three bouts preceding his rematch to Leonard, then why are people like SaadOffTheDeck outraged by this?

If the catchweight claim is true, then I can’t see any reason why anyone would be offended by Sugar Ray asking for 164lbs to be the contracted fight weight? Why are people so offended by Leonard’s actions?

I cannot think of any fighter that would be deeply upset at being asked to engage in a highly-lucrative super-fight where they had to weigh 1½lbs lighter than they did for their previous contest? How can 1½lbs be considered a form of cheating? Why are so many people that use this forum infuriated about this?

At the end of the day, this is an unsubstantiated claim, which may untrue. And even if it is, then it’s the most redundant catchweight stipulation in the history of the sport of boxing.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:It's not a claim, it's a fact. Google it dumb ass.

I’m willing to consider the possibility that it’s true, since so many people seem to “know” about it, but even if it is… it hard to understand the reason why people are so infuriated about the catchweight stipulation, since it cannot possibly have affected the outcome of the contest in any way.

I’d like to appreciate the reason why so many people were offended by Leonard’s actions, since they seem to be crying over spilled milk?

Enlightened-One wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:It's not a claim, it's a fact. Google it dumb ass.

I’m willing to consider the possibility that it’s true, since so many people seem to “know” about it, but even if it is… it hard to understand the reason why people are so infuriated about the catchweight stipulation, since it cannot possibly have affected the outcome of the contest in any way.

I’d like to appreciate the reason why so many people were offended by Leonard’s actions, since they seem to be crying over spilled milk?

Nobody is infuriated. You're just an asshole.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Nobody is infuriated. You're just an asshole.

So when you said these two things, you were just exaggerating – being more harsh than necessary?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Leonard certainly used [catchweights] to his advantage... Hearns only got a rematch because ray thought he was shot, but me made him boil down to 162 just in case.

From what I’ve learned in this thread, there has only been ONE occasion whereby Sugar Ray requested a meaningful catchweight stipulation, with the affected fighter in question claiming that it wasn’t an issue for him and that it had no impact whatsoever on the outcome of the fight.

It's a fact. If you want to believe it or not is your discretion. If you don't think it matters you under estimated weight in boxing. No offence is meant, but you do.

Fact - Hearns vs Leonard 2 was a super middleweight fight

Fact - the fight weight limit was not at the divisional limit 168.

Question for you - who is the naturally bigger man Hearns or Leonard

Question 2 - who had weighed in heavier generally prior to this fight? Hearns or Leonard?

Question 3 - who do you think the catchweight benefits? The naturally heavier man boiling down, or the smaller man who'll hit that weight?

Question 4 - from a combination of the above the facts and question answers can you come to a logical assumption of what has gone on?

If yes - great you can achieved what you came here for. You've learnt

If no - google.com may assist

Enlightened-One wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Nobody is infuriated. You're just an asshole.

So when you said these two things, you were just exaggerating – being more harsh than necessary?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Leonard certainly used [catchweights] to his advantage... Hearns only got a rematch because ray thought he was shot, but me made him boil down to 162 just in case.

From what I’ve learned in this thread, there has only been ONE occasion whereby Sugar Ray requested a meaningful catchweight stipulation, with the affected fighter in question claiming that it wasn’t an issue for him and that it had no impact whatsoever on the outcome of the fight.

No, I was answering a question. Everything I said is absolutely true, minus getting the weight wrong.

Ossyrules wrote:It's a fact. If you want to believe it or not is your discretion. If you don't think it matters you under estimated weight in boxing.

During the two-years preceding his rematch to Leonard, the Hitman weighed 159½lbs, 160lbs and 165½lbs for the three bouts he competed in during that period. The assumption is that Sugar Ray requested a 164lbs catchweight. If this stipulation is true, then it clearly had no impact on the outcome of the bout.

Ossyrules wrote:Fact - Hearns vs Leonard 2 was a super middleweight fight

True.

Ossyrules wrote:Fact - the fight weight limit was not at the divisional limit 168.

True - based on the official weights of both combatants.

Ossyrules wrote:Question for you - who is the naturally bigger man Hearns or Leonard.

As of the 12th June 1989, all we knew was that Hearns was the taller man.

Ossyrules wrote:Question 2 - who had weighed in heavier generally prior to this fight? Hearns or Leonard? .

Based on the two years preceding the rematch, there was no real difference between either man.

Ossyrules wrote:Question 3 - who do you think the catchweight benefits? The naturally heavier man boiling down, or the smaller man who'll hit that weight?

I can’t see there being any real benefit, considering the fact that both men typically fought around the 160lbs mark (161lbs to be mathematically-correct) for the two years leading up to and including their rematch.

If Leonard wanted to compete at 160lbs, but Hearns wanted 168lbs, with the catchweight being 164lbs… then why did both men officially weigh 160lbs and 162½lbs respectively if the weight really mattered?

Ossyrules wrote:Question 4 - from a combination of the above the facts and question answers can you come to a logical assumption of what has gone on?

Yes. Sugar Ray Leonard realised that he couldn’t compete effectively above 160lbs and he his guilty of requesting only ONE meaningful catchweight stipulation, which ultimately didn't have any impact whatsoever on the outcome of the fight.

Ossyrules wrote:If yes - great you can achieved what you came here for. You've learnt

I’ve come to a dissatisfactory conclusion, which was unduly influenced by rumour (or claims that cannot be verified).

Ossyrules wrote:If no - google.com may assist

Goggle doesn’t support the Hearns-Leonard catchweight claims, but even if it did, it was the most redundant catchweight stipulation in the history of the sport of boxing.

A photo of Chavez Jr. that was published over the weekend - allegedly weighing around the 178lbs-mark.

EO

They couldn't weigh in at 168, the super middle limit. There was a catch weight set, 164.

Try going back 1 fight further than the 2 fights in your research and you'll see that Hearns fought at 173. It changes the landscape a little.

if you won't acknowledge that Hearns was a bigger man than ray Leonard you're extremely naive. And there will be very little I can say without a naive response. This isn't a court of law to prove beyond reasonable doubt. It's clear to see that Hearns was bigger, and ray Leonard set the catch weight under the motive that it would give him a sort of advantage of sorts. In hindsight you may argue the point re advantage gained as Hearns came in under the catch weight, he never weighed that light again for the rest of his career.

If you think that a catch weight is set without one fighter trying to benefit or disadvantage the other you're very very naive. And if you think the terms of the weight are being dominated by Hearns you'd be even more naive. Which would leave ray Leonard as the one calling the shots.

How much you think the catch weight effect Hearns is your opinion. Decide what you like. But anyone with one eye can see the rest

hearns vs leonard 2 http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Sugar ... meeting%29

dickbelden wrote:hearns vs leonard 2 http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Sugar ... meeting%29

The notes can be edited by anyone.

Can someone please provide him a copy of the contract so everyone can move on?

Ossyrules wrote:They couldn't weigh in at 168, the super middle limit. There was a catch weight set, 164.

I never disputed this; it’s just that I cannot find any evidence about it. I’m actually a little confused as to the reason why this even was requested, especially when armed with the benefit of hindsight.

Ossyrules wrote:Try going back 1 fight further than the 2 fights in your research and you'll see that Hearns fought at 173. It changes the landscape a little.

It was a one-off contest. He fought at or around the 160lbs mark for the three years that followed that bout. In fact, the gap between his first bout at light heavy and his second, was four years.

Ossyrules wrote:if you won't acknowledge that Hearns was a bigger man than ray Leonard you're extremely naive.

I conceded that Tommy Hearns was the taller man. However, from 1977 up until 1989, the ‘Hitman’ and Leonard pretty much campaigned in the very same weight classes around the same time. If there was a difference in the overall physical size of both men during that period, then it wasn’t significant. Hearns may have been “bigger” than Leonard in 1990’s, but that is out-of-scope of our discussion.

Ossyrules wrote:If you think that a catch weight is set without one fighter trying to benefit or disadvantage the other you're very very naive.

The so-called “advantage” is either non-existent or trivial to the point of being meaningless. The stats prove this.

Ossyrules wrote:How much you think the catch weight effect Hearns is your opinion. Decide what you like. But anyone with one eye can see the rest

You clearly believe that Sugar Ray Leonard somehow “cheated” by requesting a catchweight stipulation of 164lbs, which unfairly “weight-drained” Tommy Hearns… and that’s your prerogative to feel that way. However, the stats and Tommy Hearns’ own comments about that fight tell a completely different story.

You may accuse me of being naïve, but my opinion isn’t based on gut instinct, it’s based on real-world facts.

In my mind, the 164lbs Hearns-Leonard catchweight is most redundant contractual stipulation in the history of the sport of boxing.

Enlightened-One wrote:

dickbelden wrote:hearns vs leonard 2 http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Sugar ... meeting%29

The notes can be edited by anyone.

You can always go on wikipedia yourself and dispute the claims Leonard Hearns 2 by inserting a citation.

punchoutsb wrote:Can someone please provide him a copy of the contract so everyone can move on?

I'm only being polite and responding to the people that provide me with feedback. It's rude to ignore people.

Enlightened-One wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:Can someone please provide him a copy of the contract so everyone can move on?

I'm only being polite and responding to the people that provide me with feedback. It's rude to ignore people.

WHat proof other than people reporting on it do you think would exist. Can you provide more evidence that Mayweather-Canelo was a catchweight other than it being reported and talked about? Same as the evidence provided here.

does any1 else on here remember that SRL refused steroid testing for hearns vs leonard 2 ? tommie hearns & emanuel steward asked for it but SRL refused.

It all came about EO when I raised the point about catch weights and not being a fan of them, then asked was it ray Leonard we have to thank for them? Someone replied saying they go further back etc, you then request more information as you are unaware. That's it.

Simply put

The fight had a catchweight

It wasn't Hearns that dictated that

Decide as you will. Sometimes you need to help yourself as being as obstructive as you are is counter productive to your learning

Enlightened-One wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Can you please do me a favour and provide some evidence of your "fact", because I couldn't find any? I'm not saying you're wrong, but this is the first time I've heard about this and I'm genuinely intrigued? I want to learn more about this.

I've spent a fair bit of time researching this, but I couldn't find anything from a reliable source, other than a few comments on various boxing forums.
.

Have you been following boxing long?

I have been following the sport for a very long time, but that doesn’t mean that I’m someone that possesses profound and infinite knowledge of every single aspect of boxing.
.

You got that right

Nacho says Jr weighs around 172:

http://www.BS.com/julio-cesar- ... um=twitter

Chavez Jr. weighs 172 and the fight is 4 weeks away. Only two pounds per week Jr. has to lose. Jr. should be able to do it.

Enlightened One - You stupid motherfucker. Read my post. You can find the facts about the 164 catchweight on boxrec. What the hell? Mods, get rid of this irritating jerkoff.

Vamos Chavez!!!!