WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26491
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by KiwiRider »

I would unanimously approve anything that made me more money.
But I don't approve of this.
CMCanavessi
Super Bantamweight
Posts: 513
Joined: 27 Apr 2021, 10:06

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by CMCanavessi »

Back to 6
p4p1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5852
Joined: 23 Apr 2007, 07:43

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by p4p1 »

gregregegg wrote: 01 Dec 2023, 09:09 So stupid. If your going to change make cruiser 190 super cruiser 210…


225 is massive. No diet and a water weight cut 80 % of top heavies can make that.

Diet and a water cut 90% can.

It’s just B grade heavyweight.
100% agree with this.
Even the ‘super heavyweights’ they are talking about *could* make the cut to get to 225. 175 to 200 is a huge jump. SMW - 168lbs LHW - 175lbs CW - 200lbs :o not sure how that makes all that much sense.
Anyway 190 would give some good fights, 210 would make smaller HWs need to be in shape to compete. Again giving us some good fights.
AngryGoon38
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1837
Joined: 10 Jun 2008, 14:51

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by AngryGoon38 »

CMCanavessi wrote: 03 Jan 2024, 20:09 Back to 6
Flyweight
Bantamweight
Featherweight
Lightweight
Welterweight
Middleweight
Lightheavyweight
Heavyweight

That was the 8 weight divisions from back in the days of no Jr weight divisions, no cruisers, and many lightheavyweights packing on 5 lbs to take on heavyweights. Tommy Loghran, at 5'11, weighing 184 took on 6'6, 270 lb Primo Carnera in the 1930's. That's basically the equivalent of Beterbeiv or Bivol packing on a few lbs and taking on Joshua or Wilder.
The 6 weight divisions that you alluded to, had no Batmanweight or featherweight divisions. From Flyweight directly to Lightweight. It's A crazy thought picturing a flyweight packing on a few lbs to take on a lightweight.

The weight division that puzzled and bothered me the most ever, as a boxing fan, was Super Bantamweight(115).
"Johnny Tapia" was the Greatest standout ever, in that very odd weight division.
In a 6 weight division scenario, you could easily have A "Johnny Tapia" sort of fellow versus a "Tank Davis" type.
This would create a very high risk of death in the ring type of scenario. You know that a Johnny Tapia, or likewise type of 115 lb'er would be battling in that ring, practically gladiator arena mindset approach, until they die in there, against an opponent who is just too strong and powerful. Tapia would've been that type, at 115 lbs, taking on much bigger stronger 135'ers.

He'd be too tough and brave and game for his own good. :neutral:
9 weight divisions Could be Quite Proper and Doable. That's the 8 that I listed, along with the Cruiserweight division added on.
Otherwise you'd have Beterbeiv or Bivol moving up to HW, and taking on Joshua, Wilder, or Fury, And ultimately getting themselves killed in the ring versus someone a head taller, and one and A half times they're weight. :neutral:
omalley
Featherweight
Posts: 176
Joined: 08 Mar 2020, 16:21

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by omalley »

AngryGoon38 wrote: 15 Jan 2024, 07:25 9 weight divisions Could be Quite Proper and Doable. That's the 8 that I listed, along with the Cruiserweight division added on.
I don't think 9 weight divisions could be doable in the real world, it's just a dream.
I consider as doable only some minor changes to the upper limits of the Cruiserweight (CW) and bridgerweight (BrW) divisions. CW: 200->190 (as it was initially); BrW: 224-> 215 (maybe 210).
RScarf1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1418
Joined: 18 Aug 2005, 22:31

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by RScarf1 »

I am not against having a bridgerweight/super cruiserweight division, but this has been done all wrong by the WBC and WBA in my opinion. If the sanctioning bodies lowered the cruiserweight limit from 200 to 195 and then made the bridgerweight limit at 215, there would be a 20 pound gap between light heavyweight (175) and cruiserweight (195). There would also be a 20 pound gap between bridgerweight (215) and cruiserweight (195). This would make more logical sense and I believe that the other sanctioning bodies would agree to this. 224 pounds is too high for a bridgerweight division. If Evander Holyfield was young now and trying to move from cruiserweight to heavyweight, it would be more difficult to get above 224 pounds as opposed to 215. It seems that the WBC did not look at boxing history too closely. They were just saying heavyweights are getting taller and heavier, so this is what we are doing.
funso banjo baby
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 23 Sep 2005, 11:05

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by funso banjo baby »

I have far less patience for `world` titles like whatever the likes of Charr and Dubois held.
margaret thatcher
Featherweight
Posts: 39220
Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by margaret thatcher »

looks like tischenko had an under the radar positive test and the inaugral wba super cruiser title bout was a no contest
joshj909
Lightweight
Posts: 5891
Joined: 01 Dec 2017, 06:16

Re: WBA Unanimously Approves 'Super Cruiserweight' Division

Post by joshj909 »

margaret thatcher wrote: 21 May 2024, 03:19 looks like tischenko had an under the radar positive test and the inaugral wba super cruiser title bout was a no contest
A sign to scrap the division.
Post Reply