There's been more of them historically than I'd first realised.
Hidden Content
Original & Best: The Sugar Man
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.
Last edited by Britkid; 10-21-2015 at 03:47 AM.
"Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it."
George Foreman
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."
Boxing is with the possible exception of Formula One, the most capitalist driven sport in the world, it is ultimately about money, because if you are stepping into the ring to fight and money is not your main motive for doing so, you should for your own health, not be allowed to fight.
Geale got a pay day against a top name fighter; a pay day he may not of got against any other fighter in his division; same went for Lalonde against Leonard. So there really is no issue, and there is no catchweight title fights, that truly is a contradiction in terms...
Last edited by Britkid; 10-21-2015 at 05:37 AM.
"Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it."
George Foreman
I would venture to say that less than 1% make big money! and for the vast majority that according to you shouldn't be allowed to box, money is not their main motive. Also , money has never been the amateur boxers' main motive now or in the past.
I would also say money wasn't the main motive for many,many boxers in the 30's , 40's, 50's and 60's .
Without these people, the sport you like to watch would not even exist.
This is a whole sport, don't get carried away with the top 1%.
Apologies for butting in but actually, I think it is you who is getting carried away with the 1%.
Sorry. I just have a very strong sense of irony.
Hidden Content
Original & Best: The Sugar Man
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".
I don't disagree with you so let me rephrase. Miguel Cotto (for his part in the Daniel Geale fight) is not as bad an individual as say Luis Resto, they don't compare.
But, he and anyone else (including Geale) who sanctioned, promoted or participated in that fight in any way should have a good look at themselves.
What they did is disregard good sense and ignore precedent in allowing a healthy man to enter the ring against a man who was clearly crippled by weight. They collectively took all the hard lessons we have learned about fighter safety and dehydration and threw them in the bin, all in the name of paper titles and making a buck.
Geale may have been well compensated for his efforts (or lack thereof) but had things gone tits up in there, his medical bills would have carried on growing long after his pay day was gone. We would then as a boxing community be looking at the governing body, the promoter and the athletic commission to be providing support to him and his family.
It is a fighters choice, but how many fighters have the luxury of turning down career high paydays? The sanctioning bodies in certain circumstances should remove the opportunity to say yes in my opinion.
When God said to the both of us "Which one of you wants to be Sugar Ray?" I guess I didnt raise my hand fast enough
Charley Burley
I'm sure it'll come across as an inevitable defense of Cotto, but while I agree that a fighter's wellbeing and safety come before all else, it's hardly the opponent's responsibility to gauge whether "X" amount of weight loss is going to physically hurt the other fighter. As with all other fighters who have established catchweights, Cotto set the weight and Geale's camp accepted. Maybe Geale was willing to make the sacrifice in order to secure the payday. But his people are the ones who should've known better. Sadly, this is neither the first nor the last time this type of thing has happened, and it may take a near-tragedy in the ring to set people's minds straight.
I stand by what I wrote. If you are fighting for a £Million or for £50; if that money is not your primary motivation, you should not be in the ring.
In this instance Geale I suspect got good to great money because he agreed to fight at 157lbs. What you are suggesting is that, that is wrong. I am not, I want to see fighters make as much money as possible and in some circumstances contract clauses on weight, or indeed catchweight matchmaking can help this.
Last edited by Britkid; 10-21-2015 at 11:13 PM.
"Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it."
George Foreman
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks