Catch weight fights. Like them, hate them, don't care, or undecided?

[IamInuit]

You want to have a childish silly catchweight for some super fight, then go for it. Just leave the titles on the mantle at home so you can still rub one off after the fight. Dont be asking or demanding using cash or blowjobs that a champion drop his weight so you can challenge for his title that has a limit that you cant muster. Then don't challenge twerp. If you cant challenge a weight at that weight for a title that represent that weight then PISS OFF!

[beenKOed]

You want to have a childish silly catchweight for some super fight, then go for it. Just leave the titles on the mantle at home so you can still rub one off after the fight. Dont be asking or demanding using cash or blowjobs that a champion drop his weight so you can challenge for his title that has a limit that you cant muster. Then don't challenge twerp. If you cant challenge a weight at that weight for a title that represent that weight then PISS OFF!

Since when can anyone be forced to fight at a catchweight? If you do not like the terms then do not sign!

[Primo Carnera]

Catchweights are ok for making some decent match ups, but let's not kid ourselves, it is impossible to make a good argument for any title fight having a catchweight. There are weight divisions for a reason, fucking 17 of them!!!
The worst thing is that the governing bodies actually allow it.

[Britkid]

Catchweights are ok for making some decent match ups, but let's not kid ourselves, it is impossible to make a good argument for any title fight having a catchweight. There are weight divisions for a reason, fucking 17 of them!!!
The worst thing is that the governing bodies actually allow it.

If the fight is for a title, by definition it is not a catchweight fight!

[Primo Carnera]

Catchweights are ok for making some decent match ups, but let's not kid ourselves, it is impossible to make a good argument for any title fight having a catchweight. There are weight divisions for a reason, fucking 17 of them!!!
The worst thing is that the governing bodies actually allow it.

If the fight is for a title, by definition it is not a catchweight fight!

Well you would think so wouldn't you? So how do you define the Cotto v Geale fight? It was for a title, and there was a 157lb weight limit.
My point is that the WBC shouldn't have sanctioned it as a title fight.

[Britkid]

Catchweights are ok for making some decent match ups, but let's not kid ourselves, it is impossible to make a good argument for any title fight having a catchweight. There are weight divisions for a reason, fucking 17 of them!!!
The worst thing is that the governing bodies actually allow it.

If the fight is for a title, by definition it is not a catchweight fight!

Well you would think so wouldn't you? So how do you define the Cotto v Geale fight? It was for a title, and there was a 157lb weight limit.
My point is that the WBC shouldn't have sanctioned it as a title fight.

Both fighters weighed 160 or under, thus it was a Middleweight title fight...

Nearly thirty years ago the WBC were sanctioning a title fight for two different weights; if the money is right there is no issue.

A catchweight fight is when for example a 199lbs fighter fights in a non title fight against a 165lbs boxer. If it were for a title; if sanction it would be a 'Cruiserweight' fight.

[Primo Carnera]

Catchweights are ok for making some decent match ups, but let's not kid ourselves, it is impossible to make a good argument for any title fight having a catchweight. There are weight divisions for a reason, fucking 17 of them!!!
The worst thing is that the governing bodies actually allow it.

If the fight is for a title, by definition it is not a catchweight fight!

Well you would think so wouldn't you? So how do you define the Cotto v Geale fight? It was for a title, and there was a 157lb weight limit.
My point is that the WBC shouldn't have sanctioned it as a title fight.

Both fighters weighed 160 or under, thus it was a Middleweight title fight...
but Geale was told if he weighed in over 157, the fight was off. Dress it up how you like , but who actually runs the show here, the WBC or the promoters?

Nearly thirty years ago the WBC were sanctioning a title fight for two different weights; if the money is right there is no issue.
Actually there is an issue. Are we here to see who the best fighters are in each division, or just let people do what they want because "the money's right?
A catchweight fight is when for example a 199lbs fighter fights in a non title fight against a 165lbs boxer. If it were for a title; if sanction it would be a 'Cruiserweight' fight.

like I said, dress it up and make it sound how you like, but if a Fight is for the MW World title, then either boxer is entitled to come in up to the 160 limit. Therefore, for example, Geale should've been allowed to come in at 160 and Cotto can come in at whatever fucking weight he wants to , up to 160.
Because that was not the case, this means there was an agreed weight limit , i.e. A catchweight. Or is it ok because "the money was right."

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

There's been more of them historically than I'd first realised.

[Ron Swanson]

You want to have a childish silly catchweight for some super fight, then go for it. Just leave the titles on the mantle at home so you can still rub one off after the fight. Dont be asking or demanding using cash or blowjobs that a champion drop his weight so you can challenge for his title that has a limit that you cant muster. Then don't challenge twerp. If you cant challenge a weight at that weight for a title that represent that weight then PISS OFF!

Since when can anyone be forced to fight at a catchweight? If you do not like the terms then do not sign!

Perhaps you don't recall Pacquiao/Cotto negotiations? Cotto said no to the catchweight so the sanctioning body said make the fight or be stripped of your title. TR was not offering a fight at 147 though so he could not agree to fair terms. His options were agree to be weakened or lose his belt. It was not as simple as just "do not sign".