Page 1 of 1
A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 21 Nov 2022, 04:33
by Sweet Dick Willie
For example if the alleged Tank Davis Ryan Garcia bout takes place at the 136 catchweight do their performances affect their status in the junior welterweight ratings or still lightweight?
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 21 Nov 2022, 04:42
by computerrank
JackSprocket wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 04:33
For example if the alleged Tank Davis Ryan Garcia bout takes place at the 136 catchweight do their performances affect their status in the junior welterweight ratings or still lightweight?
The editors decide, to which weight division boxers are assigned to.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 21 Nov 2022, 06:50
by Sweet Dick Willie
Thanks. Could you or anyone else open it up a little for me? Not only regarding boxrec's stand but the sport as a whole.
In that particular example how would you decide and why? There are two lightweights so for me I'm thinking that it's obviously a lightweight match particularly since the catchweight is only one pound more than the lightweight limit, but then again the weight class limits are strict and I can't help but to think of the fight as a junior welterweight bout. Thus, for me and my common sense, I would position the winner (or both) on the junior welterweight rankings.
Also: if a fighter shows up at a weigh-in overweight, should it affect his rating negatively regardless the outcome of the match?
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 23 Nov 2022, 12:13
by AngryGoon38
They should be seen as Former Lightweights, choosing to co-optively weigh "Just Barely Enough" to be considered Junior Welterweights. They're doing a Mutual Agreement, as they both make they're way into A heavier weight class.
136 is A small junior-Welterweight. It still legitimately makes one a Junior-Welterweight.
176 is A Very Small Cruiserweight. It still legitimately makes one a Cruiserweight.
201 is A very small Heavyweight. It still legitimately makes one a Heavyweight.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 03 Jun 2023, 06:12
by Sweet Dick Willie
I was doing some rankings of my own and I still don't understand how some of these things work. As the fight between Oscar Valdez and Adam Lopez took place it was announced as junior lightweight but they both weighed 132. Boxrec says the fight was in the lightweight division but still Valdez advanced to number 5 in the junior lightweight division. What up?
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 03 Jun 2023, 07:56
by gregregegg
JackSprocket wrote: ↑03 Jun 2023, 06:12
I was doing some rankings of my own and I still don't understand how some of these things work. As the fight between Oscar Valdez and Adam Lopez took place it was announced as junior lightweight but they both weighed 132. Boxrec says the fight was in the lightweight division but still Valdez advanced to number 5 in the junior lightweight division. What up?
The fight was at lightweight but boxrec thinks Oscar is still really campaigning at jr lightweight so they rank him there…
Happens a bit now when someone dips up a divjust for one fight, boxrec keep ‘em ranked in their longer term division.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 03 Jun 2023, 11:19
by Sweet Dick Willie
gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jun 2023, 07:56
JackSprocket wrote: ↑03 Jun 2023, 06:12
I was doing some rankings of my own and I still don't understand how some of these things work. As the fight between Oscar Valdez and Adam Lopez took place it was announced as junior lightweight but they both weighed 132. Boxrec says the fight was in the lightweight division but still Valdez advanced to number 5 in the junior lightweight division. What up?
The fight was at lightweight but boxrec thinks Oscar is still really campaigning at jr lightweight so they rank him there…
Happens a bit now when someone dips up a divjust for one fight, boxrec keep ‘em ranked in their longer term division.
Any idea why the ring announcer also called it a junior lightweight bout, as did The Ring magazine?
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 03 Jun 2023, 11:30
by Sweet Dick Willie
I guess what I'm pondering is are there kind of unspoken agreements on catchweight fights (and if there are, why?) cause this is not the first time I've come across cases like this, when a match is scheduled at a certain weight class but still both of the fighters weigh in just a pound or two over the limit and it's not even mentioned... Hope you guys understand what I'm trying to say, English is not the best of my languages.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 04 Jun 2023, 21:37
by franciscojavier
gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jun 2023, 07:56
JackSprocket wrote: ↑03 Jun 2023, 06:12
I was doing some rankings of my own and I still don't understand how some of these things work. As the fight between Oscar Valdez and Adam Lopez took place it was announced as junior lightweight but they both weighed 132. Boxrec says the fight was in the lightweight division but still Valdez advanced to number 5 in the junior lightweight division. What up?
The fight was at lightweight but boxrec thinks Oscar is still really campaigning at jr lightweight so they rank him there…
Happens a bit now when someone dips up a divjust for one fight, boxrec keep ‘em ranked in their longer term division.
The weird one is when long retired boxers are listed as a division they spent very little time in. BoxRec lists Ricardo Mayorga as a Super Middleweight even though he was mainly a Welter/Junior Middle and only had a couple of fights at 168 near the end of his career. Most fighters are rated by where the bulk of their career was, not where they finished(i.e. Roberto Duran is listed as a lightweight and not as 147/154/160).
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 20 Jul 2023, 14:56
by Sweet Dick Willie
Another question guys, I'm sorry: I was just checking out the profile of Pat McCormack on boxrec and began pondering - why are three of his five fights listed as welterweight bouts when in each one of them he weighed in way over the limit and in just one his opponent was under 147? All these contradictions are making my personal rankings very difficult to make
![[icon_witsend.gif] :witzend:](./images/smilies/icon_witsend.gif)
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 20 Jul 2023, 15:41
by SportsRatings
JackSprocket wrote: ↑20 Jul 2023, 14:56
Another question guys, I'm sorry: I was just checking out the profile of Pat McCormack on boxrec and began pondering - why are three of his five fights listed as welterweight bouts when in each one of them he weighed in way over the limit and in just one his opponent was under 147? All these contradictions are making my personal rankings very difficult to make
Yep, this kind of thing makes a lot of people give up making their own personal rankings
I have enough trouble just tracking the heavyweights. They tried to make bridgerweight a thing, and there are still borderline cases with cruiserweight even.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 21 Jul 2023, 04:12
by Sweet Dick Willie
I would have supposed some of you know how these things work but maybe not
![[icon_e_biggrin.gif] :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 21 Jul 2023, 13:24
by gilgamesh
I don't think it matters. If it's a Catchweight fight, it's just a fight. Nothing's on the line.
You can rank 'em in both cases they're in between I guess.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 23 Jul 2023, 22:22
by Evander
JackSprocket wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 04:33
For example if the alleged Tank Davis Ryan Garcia bout takes place at the 136 catchweight do their performances affect their status in the junior welterweight ratings or still lightweight?
This happens at catch weight fights and throws everything a bit off.
I say split it in the middle or flip or coin and get on with it.
We are just arguing the toss over a bunch of nonsense, pick one and let's go.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 24 Jul 2023, 08:50
by pound per pound
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2022, 12:13
They should be seen as Former Lightweights, choosing to co-optively weigh "Just Barely Enough" to be considered Junior Welterweights. They're doing a Mutual Agreement, as they both make they're way into A heavier weight class.
136 is A small junior-Welterweight. It still legitimately makes one a Junior-Welterweight.
176 is A Very Small Cruiserweight. It still legitimately makes one a Cruiserweight.
201 is A very small Heavyweight. It still legitimately makes one a Heavyweight.
+1.
I might add that a 210 pound heavyweight is a very small heavyweight today. A 201 pound heavyweight is non-existent today.
I have said before that the heavyweights of today are 2-3 weight classes bigger than they were in the history of the division as in like fifty years ago. Think about it.
And today on fight night middle weights are really light heavyweight's or above. Junior Welter Weights are really Jr Middle weights.
It is a mess. Fight at the weight your represent on fight night. Then the weight classes will mean more.
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 24 Jul 2023, 10:16
by AngryGoon38
pound per pound wrote: ↑24 Jul 2023, 08:50
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2022, 12:13
They should be seen as Former Lightweights, choosing to co-optively weigh "Just Barely Enough" to be considered Junior Welterweights. They're doing a Mutual Agreement, as they both make they're way into A heavier weight class.
136 is A small junior-Welterweight. It still legitimately makes one a Junior-Welterweight.
176 is A Very Small Cruiserweight. It still legitimately makes one a Cruiserweight.
201 is A very small Heavyweight. It still legitimately makes one a Heavyweight.
+1.
I might add that a 210 pound heavyweight is a very small heavyweight today. A 201 pound heavyweight is non-existent today.
I have said before that the heavyweights of today are 2-3 weight classes bigger than they were in the history of the division as in like fifty years ago. Think about it.
And today on fight night middle weights are really light heavyweight's or above. Junior Welter Weights are really Jr Middle weights.
It is a mess. Fight at the weight your represent on fight night. Then the weight classes will mean more.
You're last points brought me to mind of the Inoue-Fulton weigh-in.
WOW, did Inoue look drained or what...?!?!
He's Definitely going to be weighing at or Quite near 140, I'd estimate, while walking into the Ring, tomorrow night in Japan.
Essentially, a Super bantam/Junior Feather, converting into A Super LW/Junior WW.
![[icon_knockout.gif] :KO:](./images/smilies/icon_knockout.gif)
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 24 Jul 2023, 15:04
by Finkel
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑24 Jul 2023, 10:16
pound per pound wrote: ↑24 Jul 2023, 08:50
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2022, 12:13
They should be seen as Former Lightweights, choosing to co-optively weigh "Just Barely Enough" to be considered Junior Welterweights. They're doing a Mutual Agreement, as they both make they're way into A heavier weight class.
136 is A small junior-Welterweight. It still legitimately makes one a Junior-Welterweight.
176 is A Very Small Cruiserweight. It still legitimately makes one a Cruiserweight.
201 is A very small Heavyweight. It still legitimately makes one a Heavyweight.
+1.
I might add that a 210 pound heavyweight is a very small heavyweight today. A 201 pound heavyweight is non-existent today.
I have said before that the heavyweights of today are 2-3 weight classes bigger than they were in the history of the division as in like fifty years ago. Think about it.
And today on fight night middle weights are really light heavyweight's or above. Junior Welter Weights are really Jr Middle weights.
It is a mess. Fight at the weight your represent on fight night. Then the weight classes will mean more.
You're last points brought me to mind of the Inoue-Fulton weigh-in.
WOW, did Inoue look drained or what...?!?!
He's Definitely going to be weighing at or Quite near 140, I'd estimate, while walking into the Ring, tomorrow night in Japan.
Essentially, a Super bantam/Junior Feather, converting into A Super LW/Junior WW.
He won't be coming to the ring at 140lbs. I thought he looked his usually small framed self, though if anything he probably looked more filled out than usual in the abdomen. But 140lbs?! No, he isn't built like Pacquaio
Re: A question considering weight classes and ratings
Posted: 28 Jul 2023, 13:31
by pound per pound
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑24 Jul 2023, 10:16
pound per pound wrote: ↑24 Jul 2023, 08:50
AngryGoon38 wrote: ↑23 Nov 2022, 12:13
They should be seen as Former Lightweights, choosing to co-optively weigh "Just Barely Enough" to be considered Junior Welterweights. They're doing a Mutual Agreement, as they both make they're way into A heavier weight class.
136 is A small junior-Welterweight. It still legitimately makes one a Junior-Welterweight.
176 is A Very Small Cruiserweight. It still legitimately makes one a Cruiserweight.
201 is A very small Heavyweight. It still legitimately makes one a Heavyweight.
+1.
I might add that a 210 pound heavyweight is a very small heavyweight today. A 201 pound heavyweight is non-existent today.
I have said before that the heavyweights of today are 2-3 weight classes bigger than they were in the history of the division as in like fifty years ago. Think about it.
And today on fight night middle weights are really light heavyweight's or above. Junior Welter Weights are really Jr Middle weights.
It is a mess. Fight at the weight your represent on fight night. Then the weight classes will mean more.
You're last points brought me to mind of the Inoue-Fulton weigh-in.
WOW, did Inoue look drained or what...?!?!
He's Definitely going to be weighing at or Quite near 140, I'd estimate, while walking into the Ring, tomorrow night in Japan.
Essentially, a Super bantam/Junior Feather, converting into A Super LW/Junior WW.
Yeah, he weight drained to make weight.