-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Were talking about 3lbs of weight.
THREE FUKIN POUNDS MAN... :mad:
I mean, we didn't have to witness the likes of Chris Byrd insisting that Wlad Klitschko loose 3,4,5,10, 11lbs, a stone in weight just to make a fukin fight.
Or Evander Holyfield tellin Lewis ''You'll you'll get ya shot as soon as you shift 10lbs in weight because OMG your so much heavier than me''!!
:rolleyes:
Catch Weights are undeniably Gay.
There are enough lower-weight class-divisions to make ANY transistion (south of Light-Heavyweight) a ''fair'' one.
The thing is though mate, if you have no excess body fat, how can you lose even 3 pounds? Either lose Muscle tissue or dehydrate, neither of which are good. Look at Frankle Gavin, the Geezer missed the Olympics because he simply could not shed a single ounce more from his body
Exactly you are right mate theres big difference losing body-fat. I got to about 8 percent body fat, and if i would of lost anymore weight i would of been noticably weaker.
And especially because boxers have much lower body-fat percentage than most normal people. I mean take an average guy he probably is what 15 percent bodyfat ?
So he could lose 3 pounds no problem because he's body-fat is higher, then get an athlete or in this case a boxer. Who is lets say 7 percent body-fat.
Which is a low percentage which takes extreme training, and dieting to get that low. I don't think he could really lose any weight without being weaker.
I mean just for your ab's to show some definition, you have to be 10 percent body-fat. And that isn't even that easy, so try and get even lower which alot of athlete's do. And then when you reach your limit.
Try and lose weight its not as easy as people think. Even if its just a couple of pounds.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Oh i give up.
Im talkin about the simple task of puttin on 3 pounds.
Why the Hell would you think im talkin about cuttin weight ???
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Were talking about 3lbs of weight.
THREE FUKIN POUNDS MAN... :mad:
I mean, we didn't have to witness the likes of Chris Byrd insisting that Wlad Klitschko loose 3,4,5,10, 11lbs, a stone in weight just to make a fukin fight.
Or Evander Holyfield tellin Lewis ''You'll you'll get ya shot as soon as you shift 10lbs in weight because OMG your so much heavier than me''!!
:rolleyes:
Catch Weights are undeniably Gay.
There are enough lower-weight class-divisions to make ANY transistion (south of Light-Heavyweight) a ''fair'' one.
The thing is though mate, if you have no excess body fat, how can you lose even 3 pounds? Either lose Muscle tissue or dehydrate, neither of which are good. Look at Frankle Gavin, the Geezer missed the Olympics because he simply could not shed a single ounce more from his body
H I think you missed the point there. Boogie is agreeing with you by saying Pacquiao should put on the 3lbs, not that Cotto should lose them.
Pheew!!
I think you saved me from a complete breakdown there buddy! :-\
**Edit, sorry Big H & ICB, im on one **
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Oh i give up.
Im talkin about the simple task of puttin on 3 pounds.
Why the Hell would you think im talkin about cuttin weight ???
I wern't really on about your comment mate, i was basically speaking to the people who think cutting weight in boxing is easy.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Were talking about 3lbs of weight.
THREE FUKIN POUNDS MAN... :mad:
I mean, we didn't have to witness the likes of Chris Byrd insisting that Wlad Klitschko loose 3,4,5,10, 11lbs, a stone in weight just to make a fukin fight.
Or Evander Holyfield tellin Lewis ''You'll you'll get ya shot as soon as you shift 10lbs in weight because OMG your so much heavier than me''!!
:rolleyes:
There are enough lower-weight class-divisions to make ANY transistion (south of Light-Heavyweight) a ''fair'' one.
The heavy weight division is the only place I think they should be used, a 210 lb man fighting someone around 260 to over 300 lbs is a serious disadvantage, but anything below light heavy is only a 7 lb difference, light heavy to cruiser is 25 lbs, there may be a need for it there also but anything from light heavy and below, no need for catch weights in my opinion.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
stebs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Were talking about 3lbs of weight.
THREE FUKIN POUNDS MAN... :mad:
I mean, we didn't have to witness the likes of Chris Byrd insisting that Wlad Klitschko loose 3,4,5,10, 11lbs, a stone in weight just to make a fukin fight.
Or Evander Holyfield tellin Lewis ''You'll you'll get ya shot as soon as you shift 10lbs in weight because OMG your so much heavier than me''!!
:rolleyes:
There are enough lower-weight class-divisions to make ANY transistion (south of Light-Heavyweight) a ''fair'' one.
The heavy weight division is the only place I think they should be used, a 210 lb man fighting someone around 260 to over 300 lbs is a serious disadvantage, but anything below light heavy is only a 7 lb difference, light heavy to cruiser is 25 lbs, there may be a need for it there also but anything from light heavy and below, no need for catch weights in my opinion.
I absolutely agree with ya mate.
Iv'e been campaigning for a genuine Super-Cruiserweight division for years ;D
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Oh i give up.
Im talkin about the simple task of puttin on 3 pounds.
Why the Hell would you think im talkin about cuttin weight ???
Read the post I quoted on ;) And you will see why I thought you were talking about weight loss - It's the only post I read and it only talks about Loss not gain, so pretty easy for me to misunderstand
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Oh i give up.
Im talkin about the simple task of puttin on 3 pounds.
Why the Hell would you think im talkin about cuttin weight ???
Read the post I quoted on ;) And you will see why I thought you were talking about weight loss - It's the only post I read and it only talks about Loss not gain, so pretty easy for me to misunderstand
Yeah sorry mate, im just on one at the minute :-\
Where's my pills...
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Oh i give up.
Im talkin about the simple task of puttin on 3 pounds.
Why the Hell would you think im talkin about cuttin weight ???
Read the post I quoted on ;) And you will see why I thought you were talking about weight loss - It's the only post I read and it only talks about Loss not gain, so pretty easy for me to misunderstand
Yeah sorry mate, im just on one at the minute :-\
Where's my pills...
;D Lol - no worries fella
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
It really depends on fighter's gene and past history. Mosley is a young 37 years old, and Cotto is an old 28 year old. You can also make the same case with other numerous fighters like B-Hop or Morales when he was 30. Donaire fought as high as 122 but he won his title 10 pounds below that. And recently Viloria had to go down 3 pounds to win his first title.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
I heard the fight is gonna be somewhere 143-144. Pacquiao's best weight is at 140, and Cotto at 147. And they have to meet in the middle. Its a simple math.
That's completely bogus logic though. If two guys are only truly effective at different weight divisions, then they shouldn't fight period. Calderon's best weight is 106, so the simple math would dictate that if he fought Pacquiao it should occur at 123 pounds right? Except no real fan want's to see a fight where both guys give up huge ground just to cash in off name recognition. If Cotto can't go below 147 without being weight drained, and Pacquiao doesn't think he can beat Miguel above 143 or whatever he wants, then it's just a tainted fight no matter what the outcome, and basically meaningless. I personally think Pacquiao could beat him handily at 147, so he should make the move up and give it a shot. If not every fight he has from now on could be a catchweight.. Mayweather or Mosley will want the fight at Welter as well, is he going to demand that they all come down in weight to fight him?
100% agree with this.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RP33
I think that the main reason we are seeing them now is because of money. There isn't enough star power in boxing in each division to just fight guys in your division to make money.. So Floyd took the big money to fight Oscar and moved up in weight.. Manny moved up in weight and Oscar dropped weight to make money, etc..
Although there are exceptions, like Taylor Pavlik II.. Taylor knew it was getting harder and harder to make 160, so he felt that if he lost, he would be a better fighter at a higher weight.. so they fought at 166.. and now taylor hasn't gone back down to middleweight ever since then..
I think that Catch weights are a great option to have.. BUT, the way that they are being used in the sport today is abusing that option.. normally there is not much "meeting in the middle", and someone is gaining/dropping more than the other which then allows people to come up with excuses.. "he gained too much weight and didn't bring his power with him" and/or "he was weight drained from sucking so much weight".
Strong Post. It is the money. That's it. In order to make the big money fights, boxers will shed a few pounds or gain a few pounds rather than fight lesser known boxers at their weight class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XaduBoxer
I've said this many times before, if all parties agreed to have a fight at a certain weight (regular weight class, catchweight or otherwise) then there's NO PROBLEM AT ALL... If a boxer agreed to fight at THAT WEIGHT then he believes that HE CAN WIN the fight at THAT WEIGHT... end of...
.
So you're supporting Pacquiao's stance :o. I'm stunned.
Seriously what is the point of having weightclasses if fighters keeping breaking those barriers? If Pacquiao wants to fight a Welterweight for a Welterweight World Title, then he should do so at 147.
If he doesn't, then he should stay at 140 and fight a 140lber.
Really? You would rather Pacquiao, the current ambassador of the sport we follow, who has the ability to interest the casual fan, to fight the Kendall Holt's and Tim Bradley's at 140 than fight Shane Mosely and Miguel Cotto at 144?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XaduBoxer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
The fuzz is that an opponent is weakened. People have given Manny a lot of respect and attention for beating bigger guys like Oscar and Hatton, he can do it again or at least has a good shot of doing it again. In my opinion Manny has Superior boxing skills, hand speed, foot movement compared to Cotto, isn't that enough of an advantage? If he shows up and fights Cotto with a good game plan and great boxing skills like he did against Oscar his chances are very good against Cotto.
Manny fought Oscar at the 147 limit, why not Cotto?
Because Hoya is a 154 boxer and PAC a 135 boxer so they met in the middle of 147...
Cotto a 147 boxer and PAC a 140 boxer now so they will meet in the middle which is 143/144...
.
Oh I get it now.
Pacman fans seems to think anytime a guy moves up in weight to fight for a title it has to be at a catch weight right? lol
That's not how it's done son. It's rarely done in boxing. When a guy moves up in weigth and wants to challenge another guys titles both are usually in good tip top condition to square off. That's just a pussy move popularize by Delahoya and Ray Leonard.
Manny's people may know that his optimal weight probably due to his shorter stature is closer to 140/135 than 147 and that fighting boxers who naturally fight at 147 will be challenging. Against Mosely, I see the point. Mosely at 147 would dominate Pacquiao. Mosely at 142, well the playing field is more even, Mosely's power and speed may not translate in the same way at the lesser weight and Manny will be at slightly above his optimal weight but still in the ball park. In addition, Mosely is a welter of average size. With Cotto, a fight at 147 makes more sense. I've always thought Cotto to be a below-average welter in size and coupled with his most recent performances, I'd give Manny the edge at 147, but either fighter could win.
It isn't true that catchweights are rare in boxing today. Off the top, Bhop-Pavlik, Juan Diaz - Paulie Malignaggi, Taylor-Pavlik II, were all at a catch weight. And those are just the big fights. I'm sure it is common in lesser fights too.
However, Pacquiao didn't opt for a catchweight against Ricky Hatton - that that was a title fight. The reason, to get back to my point earlier, is that 140 is closer to Pacquiao's optimal weight. Moving up to 147, may just be too much for Pacquiao. If that's the case, the fight shouldn't be for a welterweight title, but there still should be a fight. Who else would you rather Pacquiao fight than Mosely, Cotto, or PBF?
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Really? You would rather Pacquiao, the current ambassador of the sport we follow, who has the ability to interest the casual fan, to fight the Kendall Holt's and Tim Bradley's at 140 than fight Shane Mosely and Miguel Cotto at 144?
If the weightloss will seriously hinder Mosley or Cotto, as I suspect it will. If Manny is the best, and wants to beat the best, he should fight them at their best. Its for his benefit too. Like I said earlier, 2 of Manny's losses have been attributed to him being weight drained. Does it mean his conquerers can consider themselves amongst the best in the world because they beat him? Or did these wins prove little as they weren't fighting a full strength Pacquiao?
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Really? You would rather Pacquiao, the current ambassador of the sport we follow, who has the ability to interest the casual fan, to fight the Kendall Holt's and Tim Bradley's at 140 than fight Shane Mosely and Miguel Cotto at 144?
If the weightloss will seriously hinder Mosley or Cotto, as I suspect it will. If Manny is the best, and wants to beat the best, he should fight them at their best. Its for his benefit too. Like I said earlier, 2 of Manny's losses have been attributed to him being weight drained. Does it mean his conquerers can consider themselves amongst the best in the world because they beat him? Or did these wins prove little as they weren't fighting a full strength Pacquiao?
This post is complete ownage against the Pacman fans. The Pacman fans will say those 2 losses don't count because Pacman was weight drain and weak, but if he beats guys that are the top welterweights and gets their titles it will be an great and "fair" victory against weight drain opponents at welterweight that were considered too strong.:rolleyes:
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
What complete "ownage"? Its completely irrelevant. Those Pac was 10 years ago. He wasn't at his best. He wasn't even in to 30 p4p best back then. There's a huge diff between 1 div champ and 6 div champ. So always rubbish to compare an old Pac to a new Pac. Ownage my ass.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
What complete "ownage"? Its completely irrelevant. Those Pac was 10 years ago. He wasn't at his best. He wasn't even in to 30 p4p best back then. There's a huge diff between 1 div champ and 6 div champ. So always rubbish to compare an old Pac to a new Pac. Ownage my ass.
Its not a case of comparing old Pac to new Pac. The point I'm making are these are clear indications of how a weight drained fighter can under perform. I just feel he should fight Cotto or Mosley at their optimum weight so it doesn't hinder their performance in a fight with Pacquiao. What pisses me off about it is that he is more than capable of beating them both at 147, because he is simply that good a fighter. Thats not to say he will, but I think he would be the bookies favourite.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
It's quite clear in here that most fans of the sport does not like catch weights because of the weakening effects it has on the fighter that has to drop down to a certain weight in their contract.
I guess I can safely say its only the Pac fans that feels catch weights are acceptable because they feel that their hero can only defeat the top welterweights below their optimum weights. lol
Pac should stick to fighting guys like Kotelnik and Bradley at 140. You know at Pac's best weight. Don't play with the big boys if you can't play with them, they can hurt you!;D
Its a shame really since it is the hottest division right now, and if you take a look at it historically it has arguably the greatest fighters that fought at this division at one point such as Robinson, Armstrong, Leonard, Duran, hearns, Benitez, Trinidad, Mayweather, DeLahoya, Whittaker, etc. Too bad for Pacman! :bawling:
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Really? You would rather Pacquiao, the current ambassador of the sport we follow, who has the ability to interest the casual fan, to fight the Kendall Holt's and Tim Bradley's at 140 than fight Shane Mosely and Miguel Cotto at 144?
If the weightloss will seriously hinder Mosley or Cotto, as I suspect it will. If Manny is the best, and wants to beat the best, he should fight them at their best. Its for his benefit too. Like I said earlier, 2 of Manny's losses have been attributed to him being weight drained. Does it mean his conquerers can consider themselves amongst the best in the world because they beat him? Or did these wins prove little as they weren't fighting a full strength Pacquiao?
Cotto weighed in at 146 for the Clottey fight. 144 wouldn't be too big of a step down. Mosely, well, that is another story, no one knows for sure. My bet is that weighing 142 would hamper his ability or from another perspective, even out the playing field.
Would you give more credit to Pacquiao if he beat the top lightweights (Nate Campbell etc.) and junior welterweights (he already did that, but how about Tim Bradley etc) or if he beat Cotto at 144? If he suddenly became realistic that he just isn't big enough to fight a true welterweight at their normal weight, but dominated at 135/140.
What fights would a boxing fan rather see? Cotto at 144 or Campbell/Valero etc.?
I understand and agree that if the fight is for a welterweight belt, it should be at 147, like it was at 140 for the junior welterweight belt, but that aside, wouldn't you rather see Pac fight Cotto at 144 (assuming PBF is out of the picture)?
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
It's quite clear in here that most fans of the sport does not like catch weights because of the weakening effects it has on the fighter that has to drop down to a certain weight in their contract.
I guess I can safely say its only the Pac fans that feels catch weights are acceptable because they feel that their hero can only defeat the top welterweights below their optimum weights. lol
Pac should stick to fighting guys like Kotelnik and Bradley at 140. You know at Pac's best weight. Don't play with the big boys if you can't play with them, they can hurt you!;D
Its a shame really since it is the hottest division right now, and if you take a look at it historically it has arguably the greatest fighters that fought at this division at one point such as Robinson, Armstrong, Leonard, Duran, hearns, Benitez, Trinidad, Mayweather, DeLahoya, Whittaker, etc. Too bad for Pacman! :bawling:
That is wrong. Most fans of the sport don't like title fights that are at catch weights. Most fans correctly believe a title fight should be fought at the designated weight for that title. There isn't a problem per se with catch weights. Pavlik fought Hopkins at 170. No one made a big deal out of that because it wasn't for belts. Juan Diaz is fighting Paulie at 138, but not for belts. It is a farce if Pac claims to be a welterweight champion, but doesn't win the title at 147. That's the point.
There is a lot of action below 147. And many fighters at 147 may be willing to come down to fight Pac. The problem with fighting the guys at 140 is that he already sent beat the pulp out of the champ.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Really? You would rather Pacquiao, the current ambassador of the sport we follow, who has the ability to interest the casual fan, to fight the Kendall Holt's and Tim Bradley's at 140 than fight Shane Mosely and Miguel Cotto at 144?
If the weightloss will seriously hinder Mosley or Cotto, as I suspect it will. If Manny is the best, and wants to beat the best, he should fight them at their best. Its for his benefit too. Like I said earlier, 2 of Manny's losses have been attributed to him being weight drained. Does it mean his conquerers can consider themselves amongst the best in the world because they beat him? Or did these wins prove little as they weren't fighting a full strength Pacquiao?
Cotto weighed in at 146 for the Clottey fight. 144 wouldn't be too big of a step down. Mosely, well, that is another story, no one knows for sure. My bet is that weighing 142 would hamper his ability or from another perspective, even out the playing field.
Would you give more credit to Pacquiao if he beat the top lightweights (Nate Campbell etc.) and junior welterweights (he already did that, but how about Tim Bradley etc) or if he beat Cotto at 144? If he suddenly became realistic that he just isn't big enough to fight a true welterweight at their normal weight, but dominated at 135/140.
What fights would a boxing fan rather see? Cotto at 144 or Campbell/Valero etc.?
I understand and agree that if the fight is for a welterweight belt, it should be at 147, like it was at 140 for the junior welterweight belt, but that aside, wouldn't you rather see Pac fight Cotto at 144 (assuming PBF is out of the picture)?
In some ways, of course I would rather see the Cotto fight. But I seriously think he'll struggle. I know another 2lbs off might not be considered that big a step but if that was true, Campbell would have made weight for Funeka. I'm not convinced Cotto will be healthy and give a true account of himself at 144. So if the choice is a shell of Cotto or seeing him fight Bradley or Valero, then I would prefer Bradley or Valero. You see my point?
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
What complete "ownage"? Its completely irrelevant. Those Pac was 10 years ago. He wasn't at his best. He wasn't even in to 30 p4p best back then. There's a huge diff between 1 div champ and 6 div champ. So always rubbish to compare an old Pac to a new Pac. Ownage my ass.
Its not a case of comparing old Pac to new Pac. The point I'm making are these are clear indications of how a weight drained fighter can under perform. I just feel he should fight Cotto or Mosley at their optimum weight so it doesn't hinder their performance in a fight with Pacquiao. What pisses me off about it is that he is more than capable of beating them both at 147, because he is simply that good a fighter. Thats not to say he will, but I think he would be the bookies favourite.
Not against Mosely. If that fight happened at 147, I'd sig bet any day of the week.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
If the weightloss will seriously hinder Mosley or Cotto, as I suspect it will. If Manny is the best, and wants to beat the best, he should fight them at their best. Its for his benefit too. Like I said earlier, 2 of Manny's losses have been attributed to him being weight drained. Does it mean his conquerers can consider themselves amongst the best in the world because they beat him? Or did these wins prove little as they weren't fighting a full strength Pacquiao?
Cotto weighed in at 146 for the Clottey fight. 144 wouldn't be too big of a step down. Mosely, well, that is another story, no one knows for sure. My bet is that weighing 142 would hamper his ability or from another perspective, even out the playing field.
Would you give more credit to Pacquiao if he beat the top lightweights (Nate Campbell etc.) and junior welterweights (he already did that, but how about Tim Bradley etc) or if he beat Cotto at 144? If he suddenly became realistic that he just isn't big enough to fight a true welterweight at their normal weight, but dominated at 135/140.
What fights would a boxing fan rather see? Cotto at 144 or Campbell/Valero etc.?
I understand and agree that if the fight is for a welterweight belt, it should be at 147, like it was at 140 for the junior welterweight belt, but that aside, wouldn't you rather see Pac fight Cotto at 144 (assuming PBF is out of the picture)?
In some ways, of course I would rather see the Cotto fight. But I seriously think he'll struggle. I know another 2lbs off might not be considered that big a step but if that was true, Campbell would have made weight for Funeka. I'm not convinced Cotto will be healthy and give a true account of himself at 144. So if the choice is a shell of Cotto or seeing him fight Bradley or Valero, then I would prefer Bradley or Valero. You see my point?
Yes, I do. Fair enough. But, you can agree that 2 pounds may not be that big of a step. It may. But, it may not. If the fight is at 145, I don't see it being an issue.
The thing about Campbell is that he was prepared to fight at 135. Cotto would be prepared to fight at 144. He'd train for it. His people should know if he can do it in a healthy way. They saw what Pac can do to Hatton and ODLH, they should be watching out for Cotto in that respect.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
What complete "ownage"? Its completely irrelevant. Those Pac was 10 years ago. He wasn't at his best. He wasn't even in to 30 p4p best back then. There's a huge diff between 1 div champ and 6 div champ. So always rubbish to compare an old Pac to a new Pac. Ownage my ass.
Its not a case of comparing old Pac to new Pac. The point I'm making are these are clear indications of how a weight drained fighter can under perform. I just feel he should fight Cotto or Mosley at their optimum weight so it doesn't hinder their performance in a fight with Pacquiao. What pisses me off about it is that he is more than capable of beating them both at 147, because he is simply that good a fighter. Thats not to say he will, but I think he would be the bookies favourite.
Not against Mosely. If that fight happened at 147, I'd sig bet any day of the week.
I'd take it, because I don't think Mosley will be able to catch him. Its all well and good when you have a willing target like Margarito, but Mosley's age would show in this one I think. Its just a feeling, but I'd be happy to bet if the fight ever happens.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Cotto weighed in at 146 for the Clottey fight. 144 wouldn't be too big of a step down. Mosely, well, that is another story, no one knows for sure. My bet is that weighing 142 would hamper his ability or from another perspective, even out the playing field.
Would you give more credit to Pacquiao if he beat the top lightweights (Nate Campbell etc.) and junior welterweights (he already did that, but how about Tim Bradley etc) or if he beat Cotto at 144? If he suddenly became realistic that he just isn't big enough to fight a true welterweight at their normal weight, but dominated at 135/140.
What fights would a boxing fan rather see? Cotto at 144 or Campbell/Valero etc.?
I understand and agree that if the fight is for a welterweight belt, it should be at 147, like it was at 140 for the junior welterweight belt, but that aside, wouldn't you rather see Pac fight Cotto at 144 (assuming PBF is out of the picture)?
In some ways, of course I would rather see the Cotto fight. But I seriously think he'll struggle. I know another 2lbs off might not be considered that big a step but if that was true, Campbell would have made weight for Funeka. I'm not convinced Cotto will be healthy and give a true account of himself at 144. So if the choice is a shell of Cotto or seeing him fight Bradley or Valero, then I would prefer Bradley or Valero. You see my point?
Yes, I do. Fair enough. But, you can agree that 2 pounds may not be that big of a step. It may. But, it may not. If the fight is at 145, I don't see it being an issue.
The thing about Campbell is that he was prepared to fight at 135. Cotto would be prepared to fight at 144. He'd train for it. His people should know if he can do it in a healthy way. They saw what Pac can do to Hatton and ODLH, they should be watching out for Cotto in that respect.
Maybe, but sometimes all people see is the money. If Cotto is fit and healthy at 144 then it could be great. I just think the variable is leaving the whole thing open for excuse. Thats why I prefer fighting at a recognized weightclass. I can't understand why Pacquiao wouldn't take it at 147 really. If he lost, people wouldn't discredit him for it. If he wins, he puts the icing on a pretty incredible career. Surely its worth the risk.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Pac should just fight Cotto at his best at 147 and for his titles. No one can say s-hit about Pacman anymore including me and even the Mayweather fans can't criticize Manny since their guy hasn't faced a top welterweight that's in Cotto's class.
I hope it happens.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bzkfn
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Cotto weighed in at 146 for the Clottey fight. 144 wouldn't be too big of a step down. Mosely, well, that is another story, no one knows for sure. My bet is that weighing 142 would hamper his ability or from another perspective, even out the playing field.
Would you give more credit to Pacquiao if he beat the top lightweights (Nate Campbell etc.) and junior welterweights (he already did that, but how about Tim Bradley etc) or if he beat Cotto at 144? If he suddenly became realistic that he just isn't big enough to fight a true welterweight at their normal weight, but dominated at 135/140.
What fights would a boxing fan rather see? Cotto at 144 or Campbell/Valero etc.?
I understand and agree that if the fight is for a welterweight belt, it should be at 147, like it was at 140 for the junior welterweight belt, but that aside, wouldn't you rather see Pac fight Cotto at 144 (assuming PBF is out of the picture)?
In some ways, of course I would rather see the Cotto fight. But I seriously think he'll struggle. I know another 2lbs off might not be considered that big a step but if that was true, Campbell would have made weight for Funeka. I'm not convinced Cotto will be healthy and give a true account of himself at 144. So if the choice is a shell of Cotto or seeing him fight Bradley or Valero, then I would prefer Bradley or Valero. You see my point?
Yes, I do. Fair enough. But, you can agree that 2 pounds may not be that big of a step. It may. But, it may not. If the fight is at 145, I don't see it being an issue.
The thing about Campbell is that he was prepared to fight at 135. Cotto would be prepared to fight at 144. He'd train for it.
His people should know if he can do it in a healthy way. They saw what Pac can do to Hatton and ODLH, they should be watching out for Cotto in that respect.
They should watch out for Cotto, but all they're going to see are dollar signs.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Pac should just fight Cotto at his best at 147 and for his titles. No one can say s-hit about Pacman anymore including me and even the Mayweather fans can't criticize Manny since their guy hasn't faced a top welterweight that's in Cotto's class.
I hope it happens.
That could happen... Just like the fight at a catchweight of 143 could happen too... It all depends on all parties and conditions involved in the fight...
.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Answer me this: if Pacquiao can fight Dela Hoya at 147. Then why not Cotto, or Mosley ???
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
To be completely honest with everyone, I've always thought since Pac was the top dog, people should be coming to him and going along with what he wants not the other way around. People want to make the fight with him and he could go other directions if one party didn't agree.
But looking at some of these posts, I'm starting to think that Pac should just fight Cotto at 147. I don't even care anymore at what weight this is. I just want to see the best fighting the best, PERIOD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Pac should just fight Cotto at his best at 147 and for his titles. No one can say s-hit about Pacman anymore including me and even the Mayweather fans can't criticize Manny since their guy hasn't faced a top welterweight that's in Cotto's class.
I hope it happens.
If only that were true. All the people who want to discredit Pac always brings up the 2 early losses and being outboxed by Morales. If you're on top, you'll always have your haters. That's the way it is.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Answer me this: if Pacquiao can fight Dela Hoya at 147. Then why not Cotto, or Mosley ???
PAC weigh-in at 142 for the Hoya fight and weigh 148 on fight night...
Cotto weigh-in at 146 in his last fight against Clottey and probably weighs 160 on fight night...
Mosley weigh-in at 147 in his last fight against Margcheat and probably weighs 160 on fight night...
Do you want PAC to give away at least 12 lbs to those guys on fight night by accepting a 147 fight? If they want a fight at 147, why don't they just call out a big 147 guy instead of calling out PAC... Paul Williams is ready to fight them at 147...
.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Answer me this: if Pacquiao can fight Dela Hoya at 147. Then why not Cotto, or Mosley ???
Because Oscar was weight drain at 147 and 35 years old at the time of the match. Age plus the weight Oscar has to come down to equals just a moving target. Cotto at 147 is at his best and in his prime and a more dangerous fight, but a weight drain Cotto would only be half as effective. We all know why Cotto had to move up from 140 to 147 because he was weak and could barely make weight.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Answer me this: if Pacquiao can fight Dela Hoya at 147. Then why not Cotto, or Mosley ???
that's cos when pac fought dlh he weighed in at 142lbs. for the the hatton fight he was 139. around those weight he performs best. dlh fought him at a lower weight to level the playing field, and even at 147 most people are saying pac doesn't stand a chance and oscar will demolish him. who would have known? it's not like pac is the one who want to fight these heavier guys. both sides wanted the fight and right now them bigger guys are trying to get in front of each other to get that fight. some of your are saying if pac wants to fight mosley or cotto he should fight them at their optimum weight, but then it wouldn't be at pac's optimum weight would it? then it wouldn't be fair and a victory for the bigger guys would also be tainted having picked on the smaller guy. it actually plays both ways, pac beats them at 147 he gets more credit, they beat pac at a catchweight they get more credit.
i actually don't like catchweights but these are the best fights to be made around those weights and i think there shouldn't really be much of a problem, and it's not like it hasn't been done before, as long as they meet at weight where both sides wouldn't be placed at too much of a disadvantage. 144.5-145lbs imo is fair.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Pac is the boss. He dictate the terms. If they want the money, they're gonna have to come down and REALLY earn it, and not the other way around. Pac gambled his reputation fighting the now ex-cash cow DLH, and now they're gonna have to do the same thing for Pac.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
Pac is the boss. He dictate the terms. If they want the money, they're gonna have to come down and REALLY earn it, and not the other way around. Pac gambled his reputation fighting the now ex-cash cow DLH, and now they're gonna have to do the same thing for Pac.
Too bad the BOSS now is a smaller man... Bigger boxers has to drain themselves in order to get a fight with the BOSS...
.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
dont mind them in general if its your regular boxing contest.
But big PPV fights should ALWAYS be for said championship of the world!
Spoils the whole aura of the event if this supposed super fight isnt even for a title!!
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Yeah. Them 147 guys could be drained, but I'm pretty sure 28 out of 30 boxing writters will not pick against them. I'm talking about how huge underdog Pac was against DLH btw.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XaduBoxer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
Pac is the boss. He dictate the terms. If they want the money, they're gonna have to come down and REALLY earn it, and not the other way around. Pac gambled his reputation fighting the now ex-cash cow DLH, and now they're gonna have to do the same thing for Pac.
Too bad the BOSS now is a smaller man... Bigger boxers has to drain themselves in order to get a fight with the BOSS...
.
:rolleyes:
And there you have it. The mentality of the modern day Boxing fan.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jimboogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XaduBoxer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
Pac is the boss. He dictate the terms. If they want the money, they're gonna have to come down and REALLY earn it, and not the other way around. Pac gambled his reputation fighting the now ex-cash cow DLH, and now they're gonna have to do the same thing for Pac.
Too bad the BOSS now is a smaller man... Bigger boxers has to drain themselves in order to get a fight with the BOSS...
.
:rolleyes:
And there you have it. The mentality of the modern day Boxing fan.
Of course The BOSS won't put himself too much of a disadvantage by giving too much weight to the bigger for he is The BOSS... The BOSS wants even playing field....;)
.
-
Re: What do you think of Catch weights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quinito
Yeah. Them 147 guys could be drained, but I'm pretty sure 28 out of 30 boxing writters will not pick against them. I'm talking about how huge underdog Pac was against DLH btw.
An obvious nuthugger ....... ODLH : A guy that fights once a year in his twilight years dropping in weight and enters a fight looking light a weight drained corpse ...... Catch weight = metro sexual !!!!! You want to fight and beat a bigger man then move up and gain all the accolades that come with a win and no bashing for losing by challenging a bigger man !!! The catch weight should be at the minmum of that classified division or same day weigh in ... period !! ( tweener wights) Pussy promoters and pussy fighters with a caution shield in a violent sport!
