Jump to content

Why is there a view that divisions are "between" A


iamasadlittleboy
 Share

Recommended Posts

As far as I'm aware no organisation enforces a "minimum" weight for a division.

 

For example the WBO Rules Section 3 states merely "Up to" the maximum weight allowed (no minimum weight for a division). For example "Featherweight

Up to 126 lbs or 57.15 kgs."*

 

The IBF also enforce an "up to" policy as seen in rule 1 of their "Rules Governing Championship Contests With Amendments" PDF.*

 

The WBA's rule book only seems to mention the weights for females but again this is an "up to" ruling not a "between" rule.

 

WBO rules can be found here:

http://www.wbo-europe.com/files/file/wbo_rules.pdf

 

IBF rules on contests can be found here:

http://assets.ibf-usba-boxing.com/File/RulesGoverningChampionshipContestsWithAmendments.pdf

 

*They both seem to insist on a minimum weight for Heavyweight, the only division it appears, that does have a minimum limit, and one that is easy to get around as we've seen more than once in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: Why is there a view that divisions are "between&quo

 

Scott-

That very subject was my biggest complaint when Ray Leonard won TWO titles, a LH one and the newly created SMW one, by beating a single opponent Donnie LaLonde. It's either a LH fight or a SMW fight, but apparently for a SRL it can be both rules2// smell//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Why is there a view that divisions are "between&amp

 

Scott-

That very subject was my biggest complaint when Ray Leonard won TWO titles, a LH one and the newly created SMW one, by beating a single opponent Donnie LaLonde. It's either a LH fight or a SMW fight, but apparently for a SRL it can be both rules2// smell//

 

Yep, and wasn't even that iffy, due to the fact that if L / Heavy covered 169 to 175 ( allowing for the newly created division ) how come Leonard demanded Donny was a max 167? I just cant see how the 175 title can be on the line in that fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Why is there a view that divisions are "between&amp

 

Scott-

That very subject was my biggest complaint when Ray Leonard won TWO titles, a LH one and the newly created SMW one, by beating a single opponent Donnie LaLonde. It's either a LH fight or a SMW fight, but apparently for a SRL it can be both rules2// smell//

 

Yep, and wasn't even that iffy, due to the fact that if L / Heavy covered 169 to 175 ( allowing for the newly created division ) how come Leonard demanded Donny was a max 167? I just cant see how the 175 title can be on the line in that fight.

 

The point is that LHW isn't 169-175 it's 0-175 according to the WBO, IBF and WBA according to the bodies there is no lower limits on divisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Why is there a view that divisions are "between&amp

 

Scott-

That very subject was my biggest complaint when Ray Leonard won TWO titles, a LH one and the newly created SMW one, by beating a single opponent Donnie LaLonde. It's either a LH fight or a SMW fight, but apparently for a SRL it can be both rules2// smell//

 

Yep, and wasn't even that iffy, due to the fact that if L / Heavy covered 169 to 175 ( allowing for the newly created division ) how come Leonard demanded Donny was a max 167? I just cant see how the 175 title can be on the line in that fight.

 

The point is that LHW isn't 169-175 it's 0-175 according to the WBO, IBF and WBA according to the bodies there is no lower limits on divisions.

 

Exactly, and if you mention it to them then I bet the first thing out of their mouths will be Henry Armstrong and his fighting for the MW title against Ceferino Garcia, like the one exception made by a great fighter should be the standard. As long as the money is right, I'm sure they'd okay Manny Pacquiao for a Light Heavyweight title fight, it'd be the Commission that'd have to step in and rule it unsafe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Why is there a view that divisions are "between&amp

 

Scott-

That very subject was my biggest complaint when Ray Leonard won TWO titles, a LH one and the newly created SMW one, by beating a single opponent Donnie LaLonde. It's either a LH fight or a SMW fight, but apparently for a SRL it can be both rules2// smell//

 

Yep, and wasn't even that iffy, due to the fact that if L / Heavy covered 169 to 175 ( allowing for the newly created division ) how come Leonard demanded Donny was a max 167? I just cant see how the 175 title can be on the line in that fight.

 

The point is that LHW isn't 169-175 it's 0-175 according to the WBO, IBF and WBA according to the bodies there is no lower limits on divisions.

 

Exactly, and if you mention it to them then I bet the first thing out of their mouths will be Henry Armstrong and his fighting for the MW title against Ceferino Garcia, like the one exception made by a great fighter should be the standard. As long as the money is right, I'm sure they'd okay Manny Pacquiao for a Light Heavyweight title fight, it'd be the Commission that'd have to step in and rule it unsafe.

 

Ketchel/O'Brien and even Burns (as champion) v Johnson were all Light Heavyweights

Carpentier v Dempsey (Carpentier was 172)

Conn v Louis I (Conn was under the Light Heavyweight limit)

 

Just the first examples I can think of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont just accept that for one minute. I think you would need to look deeper into the rules. I will accept you can weigh whatever you like to challenge for any title, but ffs its plain stupid to think a fighter can demand you come down from say Cruiser to L/ Middle but he still wants your Cruiser title if he wins. By definition you are not fighting at Cruiser, so the 0 - 190 theory doesn't work.

 

I dont care who says the fight cant happen, doctor, commision whoever, but someone would stop the fight from happening. The alphabet mob are only interested in sanction fees, nobody with even half a brain takes them seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont just accept that for one minute. I think you would need to look deeper into the rules. I will accept you can weigh whatever you like to challenge for any title, but ffs its plain stupid to think a fighter can demand you come down from say Cruiser to L/ Middle but he still wants your Cruiser title if he wins. By definition you are not fighting at Cruiser, so the 0 - 190 theory doesn't work.

 

I dont care who says the fight cant happen, doctor, commision whoever, but someone would stop the fight from happening. The alphabet mob are only interested in sanction fees, nobody with even half a brain takes them seriously.

 

You don't need to accept it but their is nothing in any of the title awarding bodies rules that states you need to be OVER any weight (the local commissions rules are generally disregarded in favour of the title bodies rules when a title comes into play-think British cuts rules if you need to).

 

The demands by a challenger aren't anything to do with this but the idea that a champion and challenger could in theory BOTH be under the maximum weight for the division lower.

 

The ABC do have something in their rule book regarding "guidelines" but like the BBBofC their rules would be over-ruled by the title bodies when they conflict with each other (as long as the commission licenses both fighters, though in this case their rules would never be infringed). Whilst we would never expect a Light Flyweight to fight a Cruiserweight we could legitimately expect someone weighing 153-154 to challenge a small middleweight or even a guy who is 167 or 168 to fight a 175lb champion...or even Brian Viloria (112lbs) fighting someone who holds a title at 115 (Suriyan Sor Rungvisai for example).

 

Some pretty recent examples that I can find from 2001 was Jorge Arce 107.5 v Juanito Rubillar 105 (Light Flyweight title) Rubillar weighed in effectively as a mini flyweight in an interim WBC title fight

 

And just last year we had a WBO Latino super flyweight title fight saw Juan Mercedes (115) facing Luis Maldonado (111), Malonado was a full pound "underweight" and lost a razor thin majority decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is all very well , but your original statement that it is 0 - 175: is palpably bollox. No one other than greedy garbage like Sulimain, and other s**** like Arum, would even consider a fight between a 175 guy, and a 154 guy, at say 156. That is because they are subhuman filth milking money from fighters, I guarantee you there would be a thousand Dr Margaret Goodman all over the world ( that matters ) that would put the kibosh on any such fuking idiotic proposals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the lower weights, you're talking differences of maybe 2 to 7 pounds between weightclasses.

When you consider that a heavyweight fight can easily have a 150 lbs difference, then it really puts that into perspective.

Noone considers those fights mismatches, despite some incredible size differences and the bigger guy doesn't always win.

A good smaller guy can often beat a decent bigger guy with movement and speed advantages, so a few pounds doesn't always make a blind bit of difference.

Then again, it can sometimes make all the difference, particularly when a fighter boils down to an uncomfortable weight.

At the end of the day, it's down to the fighter to do what's right for them, and if a middleweight thought he could beat a cruiserweight, which isn't out of the question, then it could happen.

The weightclasses are there for a reason to try and avoid that, but like Scott said, there are only maximum weights in effect.

It may make a mockery of a division if a fighter consistently fought in one division and always weighed within a lower weightclass limit.

It wouldn't prevent them from fighting in that weightclass though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the lower weights, you're talking differences of maybe 2 to 7 pounds between weightclasses.

When you consider that a heavyweight fight can easily have a 150 lbs difference, then it really puts that into perspective.

Noone considers those fights mismatches, despite some incredible size differences and the bigger guy doesn't always win.

A good smaller guy can often beat a decent bigger guy with movement and speed advantages, so a few pounds doesn't always make a blind bit of difference.

Then again, it can sometimes make all the difference, particularly when a fighter boils down to an uncomfortable weight.

At the end of the day, it's down to the fighter to do what's right for them, and if a middleweight thought he could beat a cruiserweight, which isn't out of the question, then it could happen.

The weightclasses are there for a reason to try and avoid that, but like Scott said, there are only maximum weights in effect.

It may make a mockery of a division if a fighter consistently fought in one division and always weighed within a lower weightclass limit.

It wouldn't prevent them from fighting in that weightclass though....

 

That is the whole point though. No one with any sense would sanction a fight in which a guy had to boil down 3 divisions to make weight. However they would sanction a fight beteen a guy trying to give away 3 divisions if he wanted to.

 

All that would happen would probably be similar to Leonard with Lalonde, or indeed Jones who weighed in at 193 to Ruiz 226. Win the title, then surrender it without defending.

 

As for the heavies there is nothing to be done about them. If a guy is 7' tall and 300lbs that is what he is. Either fight him or dont. Only an idiot would expect him to boil down to 250.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone has made some pretty good points here. For me, I'd prefer weight limits existed at both ends and someone had to weigh within the range to capture a title, but then that would've denied some of the greatest fighters of all-time an opportunity to perform some of their greatest feats. Bob Fitzsimmons, Henry Armstrong, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave.

 

I dont know that I agree with you there. I think any fighter should have the right to challenge any other fighter and conceed any amount of weight he is happy to. What I will never accept and give credit to is a fighter who DEMANDS his opponent loses more weight than he otherwise would lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave.

 

I dont know that I agree with you there. I think any fighter should have the right to challenge any other fighter and conceed any amount of weight he is happy to. What I will never accept and give credit to is a fighter who DEMANDS his opponent loses more weight than he otherwise would lose.

 

Who said anything about any fighter demanding anything? This isn't about catchweights, it isn't about making demands, it isn't about winning titles after demanding a fighter loses weight, it's about the fact that either man can come in at any weight UNDER the maximum for weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know that a fighter can challenge another fighter at a higher weight. I am saying that fight has to be sanctioned, and authorised by a commision. Safety is paramount, which is why no one with a brain would sanction a fight between say Terry Norris in his prime, against Tyson in his. Title or no title. You are saying that could have happened. I'm saying its bollox. There would be more chance of Margaret Thatcher being re-elected prime ministere before anything like that could ever happen. You are also claiming there is no reule to stop it happening. Again I'm saying it a moot point that is bollox, because each proposed fight would be considered on merit with safety being the primary consideration. There is no need for a rule that says a fighter can't fight an opponent where it is more or less a given that he would be badly beaten due to him being severely outweighed, outpunched, out strengthed. Pure common sense would prevail.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know that a fighter can challenge another fighter at a higher weight. I am saying that fight has to be sanctioned, and authorised by a commision. Safety is paramount, which is why no one with a brain would sanction a fight between say Terry Norris in his prime, against Tyson in his. Title or no title. You are saying that could have happened. I'm saying its bollox. There would be more chance of Margaret Thatcher being re-elected prime ministere before anything like that could ever happen. You are also claiming there is no reule to stop it happening. Again I'm saying it a moot point that is bollox, because each proposed fight would be considered on merit with safety being the primary consideration. There is no need for a rule that says a fighter can't fight an opponent where it is more or less a given that he would be badly beaten due to him being severely outweighed, outpunched, out strengthed. Pure common sense would prevail.

 

The safety issue is the reason that a fighter will not be given a fight at an unreasonable disadvantage (remember both fighters would have to agree any way, as well as the money men, the teams etc etc). I'm saying their is no rule prohibiting a fighter to win a Light Heavyweight title whilst being a Middleweight or a Super Flyweight winning a Bantamweight title.

 

Hardly a given that having size and weight advantages would guarantee a fighter a win other wise Valuev would be completely unbeatable, in fact "big freaks" could well be the perfect proof of how this sort of thing stands in. The likes of Butterbean, Dustin Nichols and Julius Long would almost certainly be able to be beaten by some of the top Cruiserweights without the Cruiserweight having any major issue. In fact in 1997 Valuev (over 300lbs) faced Alarim Uysal (who was less than 190, the then cruiserweight limit IIRC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying you wrong, the weight is an issue. Just because something is so sensible it doesn't need to be made a rule, it doesn't mean it wouldn't be disqualified from happening. Heavyweights have a minmum 200 lbs limit, because people believe that weight should be enough to allow you to fight anyone else who weighs that much or above. That is why they come in all shapes and sizes, compared to the other divisions, where fitness, and stamina are more important than bulk.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no need for a rule that says a fighter can't fight an opponent where it is more or less a given that he would be badly beaten due to him being severely outweighed, outpunched, out strengthed. Pure common sense would prevail.

 

All of those were surely true for Marquez vs Mayweather and for Pacquiao vs Larios?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on, tell me who either of those 2 severely outweighed? Are you gonna try telling me a fight between either of those 2 as they are now and Kazuto Ioka would be allowed to take place?

 

Because I am stating catagorically that it wouldn't.

 

Nothing however would stop Ioka from facing Wonjongkam or Gonzalez and weigh in at 105 if he so wished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mayweather was surely much heavier than Marquez, given he even had to alter to the contract so he could weigh in heavier, and was far more likely to have gained weight on the night.

 

Larios was jumping two divisions from a weight where he'd looked at the end of the line and been battered into submission, so he had absolutely no chance of even competing with Pacquiao and so it proved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is NOT what you originally said. You said that any fighter can fight any other fighter regardless of weight, and size disadvantages. In fact you wrote it is 0 - 175. I am saying that is wrong, and there is no need to make a rule about it, which is why there isn't one. Outside of the Heavies no one would sanction a fight where one guy was outweighed by 40 - 50lbs. Again there is no need to make a rule concerning this, its just common sense.

 

Lets imagine for a moment that Jones had already been KO'd by Tarver, and Glenn Johnson, but his ego wanted another crack at a title. Do you honestly believe he would have been allowed to fight even a shit Heavy like Ruiz, and give away 30+lbs?

 

No chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mayweather was surely much heavier than Marquez, given he even had to alter to the contract so he could weigh in heavier, and was far more likely to have gained weight on the night.

 

Larios was jumping two divisions from a weight where he'd looked at the end of the line and been battered into submission, so he had absolutely no chance of even competing with Pacquiao and so it proved.

 

I think you have been taking too much notice of Martin on Banter, who is convinced Mayweather is some kind of huge Welter. He weighs no more than 154 come fight time, and in fact weighed less than Hatton in the ring. So Marquez may well have been outweighed by half a stone.

 

As for Pakow, and Larios. I have no idea what Oscar weighed in the ring, but I will more or less guarantee you Pakow weighed 144 max, which is what he had been weighing for a few years, whatever he wieghs in at. It is only lately that he averages 148, and was even 149 for DLH, i believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, assuming that to be true, where is the line? Marquez was blatantly going to be outboxed, out-muscled, outpunched, but because it was "only" 1 or 2 divisions it was OK?

 

If a guy wants to weigh in at 140 and contend a welter title, is that ok? Apparently it is given PAcquiao's light-middle tilt was him weighing in at 144lbs. So 10lbs under the limit is OK. Is 15? if 15 is, why isn't 20? How about 17.5?

 

In my opinion, there should be a written lower limit for each division, especially for title fights, because otherwise you could go on forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is NOT what you originally said. You said that any fighter can fight any other fighter regardless of weight, and size disadvantages. In fact you wrote it is 0 - 175. I am saying that is wrong, and there is no need to make a rule about it, which is why there isn't one. Outside of the Heavies no one would sanction a fight where one guy was outweighed by 40 - 50lbs. Again there is no need to make a rule concerning this, its just common sense.

 

Lets imagine for a moment that Jones had already been KO'd by Tarver, and Glenn Johnson, but his ego wanted another crack at a title. Do you honestly believe he would have been allowed to fight even a shit Heavy like Ruiz, and give away 30+lbs?

 

No chance.

 

Considering a person can't physically weight 0lbs you could have used a brain cell or 2 to have worked out it was being used figuratively. If a guy who was significantly less than 175 was good enough (and probably "proven" enough) so that the size wouldn't be an issue (due to their own skills, speed and reactions) they could, in extreme cases be granted that fight.

 

Your example is bloody awful. How many fighters get stopped at one weight then claim it was due to weight gain and then jump divisions to fight again? Jones may well have been able to claim he was killing himself to make 175 and thats why he lost (we all know he had to lose a shit load of muscle).

 

If we had a truely amazing throwback fighter (think Armstrong, Greb, Robinson) who could hold their own with bigger men I don't think they should have been getting told no your not allowed unless you put weight on yourself.

 

The thread was made to show there is nothing in the rules regarding a lower limit, any fighter CAN fight for any title RE the rules. Of course they'd have to have the title awarding bodies permission (which is easier to get than it should be) and their would be little in terms of Dr's and commissions in specific places (think Panama, Latvia etc). That's not to say you will have someone like Oleydong Sithsamerchai wanting to have a fight for the Cruiserweight title even if he is technically allowed. I think we could all imagine Mayweather, Ortiz or Pacquiao fancying their chances against K9, and I think many Super Middleweights would probably fancy their chances against Shumenov as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...