BoxRec

Do you think it is fair that a challenger can win a world title if the champion comes in overweight ?

An example being Diego Coralles v Joel Casamayor in 2006.

Coralles came in at 139. Casamayor was 135. Coralles was the titleholder but only Casamayor could win it.

Surely if a either fighter fails to make weight the fight should be a non title bout ?

Why the hell not. The challenger has botherer making weight. What’s the point in non-title bout? The challenger went through a tough training camp and bothered makinh weight. Ptetty sure hemd want to still win a title.

BOTH should be on the limit or under.

If not the title should be vacated.

nobleart1978 wrote: ↑09 Aug 2018, 15:36 Do you think it is fair that a challenger can win a world title if the champion comes in overweight ?

An example being Diego Coralles v Joel Casamayor in 2006.

Coralles came in at 139. Casamayor was 135. Coralles was the titleholder but only Casamayor could win it.

Surely if a either fighter fails to make weight the fight should be a non title bout ?

Well.... Coralles wasn't actually the title holder at that point, the title was vacant.

nobleart1978 wrote: ↑09 Aug 2018, 15:50 BOTH should be on the limit or under.

If not the title should be vacated.

Well the boxer who was bothered making should be able to fight for the title at that weight limit.

The Challenger that actually stuck to the contract, and made the weight limit is still deserving of their chance to win the Championship that they trained to win. Robbing the challenger because of the lack of discipline of the Champion is bullsh*t.

By this logic anytime a Champion feels he's facing a threatening challenger he should just not bother making weight.

Punishing the challenger because of his opponents mistake/lack of discipline would be completely unfair.

I've always just accepted it and when thought about it gone with the reasoning above, that the challenger should not be punished and he did bother to make the weight.

BUT, he is winning a title in a weight class having not beaten a guy in the weight class. If a champion schedules a fight a pound above the limit it is a non-title fight no matter what the other guy weighs - if it is scheduled above the limit, its a non-title fight. Lots of champs over the years have non-title fights and if they lose, we do not expect the guy who beat them to become champion because he did not beat the champ in the division he is champion at.

Now I think about it, our reasoning for that being the case should not alter here. For consistency, we should stay the same. Sure it is punishing the challenger but should he be eg Welterweight champion when he has not beaten a guy at welterweight?

For definite, strip the champion and also do not allow him to fight for the vacant belt next time out.

If a fighter makes weight for a title fight and the champion doesn’t, thus gaining an unfair advantage, why should the challenger go through with the fight with no title on the line?

Lenny wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:02 If a fighter makes weight for a title fight and the champion doesn’t, thus gaining an unfair advantage, why should the challenger go through with the fight with no title on the line?

True. The title should always be available for the challenger if he makes weight.

Stuarty wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:11

Lenny wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:02 If a fighter makes weight for a title fight and the champion doesn’t, thus gaining an unfair advantage, why should the challenger go through with the fight with no title on the line?

True. The title should always be available for the challenger if he makes weight.

Yeh, exactly. It would be for nothing.

Stuarty wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:11

Lenny wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:02 If a fighter makes weight for a title fight and the champion doesn’t, thus gaining an unfair advantage, why should the challenger go through with the fight with no title on the line?

True. The title should always be available for the challenger if he makes weight.

True and a point I have always gone with and probably still do, just throwing a devils advocate out there of the fact he would not have actually beaten a man at the actual weight, his fault or not.

Sure it is unfair but fck, life is not fair at times and shite happens to us and not by us and we just have to suck that shite up.

tobyh5 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 08:28

Stuarty wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:11

Lenny wrote: ↑10 Aug 2018, 02:02 If a fighter makes weight for a title fight and the champion doesn’t, thus gaining an unfair advantage, why should the challenger go through with the fight with no title on the line?

True. The title should always be available for the challenger if he makes weight.

True and a point I have always gone with and probably still do, just throwing a devils advocate out there of the fact he would not have actually beaten a man at the actual weight, his fault or not.

Sure it is unfair but fck, life is not fair at times and shite happens to us and not by us and we just have to suck that shite up.

Yes life is a cùnt Toby