Home News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia
The Cyber Boxing Zone Message Board
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: New Weight Divisions needed?

  1. #1
    Steve McV
    Guest

    New Weight Divisions needed?

    Genties and ladlemen, I'm gonna make a statement which will cause groans from old time fight fans. Well, hell, I'll be hitting the half century mark at my next birthday, so maybe I'M an "old fight fan," but I speak truly, insofar as I can tell:

    We need more weight divisions.

    Yeah, yeah, I know, we've got the Junior's, and the Supers, and the Lights, and the Menthols (wait, sorry, mixing cigarettes and boxing, bad idea), we've even got Cruisers (does this mean we need Destroyers, Carriers, hell why not a Frigate division?) okay, but offestly honester... it's about the big guys. You know, those boxing ballerinas who are the massiest.

    The Crusierweight division was a good idea, too bad they can't produce a top notch fighter. (Well, okay, they gave us Holyfield.) But semi seriously, it used to be some poor schlept eats an extra pastrami on rye, goes a few ounces over 175, and suddenly he'd be facing the monsters of the squared circle. Not that the light heavy division is historically full of patsies, but even Bob Foster didn't exactly set the heavuweight division on fire when he stepped up, y'know? Punches that laid out light heavies may have hurt the big guys but didn't put them down.

    Hey, how many light heavies have won THE TITLE? Fellow named Spinks? Of course, way back when, some guy named Fitzsimmons pulled off the admirable trick of winning the heavyweight crown after being a middleweight. Later he won the light heavy championship. Ahem. I think Fitz might have been reincarnated as Tommy Hearns, what do you think?

    But again... the Cruisers were a good idea, but boxing hasn't taken the idea far enough. There's still a chance that some fella might wander in at 196 lbs and a shilling or two and be facing some ohmygod giant of 250 plus. Tisn't sporting, no precious!

    So I think we should have more divisions. How about Cruisers going from 176 to 190, and then 191 pounds up to 210, say, as the "heavyweights"? Then, 221 to 240 or whatever the Olympics have it, as the "super heavyweights." Anything over that? Well... the "Open" class? Or maybe call it the ohcripesyou'vegottobe- kidding class?

    I mean, isn't there just something inherently wrong with the term "small heavyweight"? Doesn't it imply some measure of inequality? And hey, boxing may be a damned rough sport, and we wouldn't have it any other way... but the very fact that weight divisions were created, not to mention the rules under which our warriors toil, implies a strong belief in a fair fight. And somehow, a guy weighing in at 200 pounds or less vs. some 240 plus pounder just ain't a fair fight. Well, okay, Dempsey vs. Willard wasn't really a fair fight, not when you consider what happened, but you know what I mean.

    Or, hell, just have 5 pound divisions from 100 lbs. up to 150, then 10 pound divisions up to 200, then 15 or 20 pounds per class thereafter.

    Just my two centavos for the day.

  2. #2
    GorDoom
    Guest
    Steve:

    While I understand you're reasoning I have to disagree. The heavies don't need to be subdivided. 2 examples: A 6 foot, 200 pound, Joe Louis twicwe dismantling the 6'5, 250 pound Abe Simon who was a better fighter than Big Klit. hLouis also took apart the 6'6 245 pound Buddy Baer.

    In more modern times we have a 210 pound Holyfield beating Bowe in their 2nd fight & being competetive in their other two fights.

    Once you hit 200 pounds you can take out any man,. It's a matter of skill & timing.

    GorDoom

  3. #3
    DEEAGLE
    Guest
    Hell Steve even mentioning such an idea might get you shot, drugged, raped or tarred & feathered here. I mean after all Jimmy Wilde fought & beat guys 100lbs more then he weighed, we don't need any new divisions, hell we don't need any divisions at all, since according to some of the guys on here size don't mean DICK!!! Anyway we should go back to 4OZ gloves, unlimited rounds, no divisions & finding out why we have no one since the beginning of gloved fights as to why there are no 5ft tall 120lb hwt champs. WHY the idea of a SUPER HWT division is BLASPHEMY!!!!! As a matter of fact I'm beginning to believe Rocky Marciano hit harder then King Kong!!!:rollin

  4. #4
    Roberto Aqui
    Guest

    Super DreadNaught

    Boxing needs more weight divisions about as much as it needs more Don Kings. Ya gotta be spoofin' us!

    Super Dreadnaught was first proposed when Carnera came to America, never mind he was about the only 250+ lb fighter at the time. It ain't like French wine. The idea ain't got no better with age.

  5. #5
    AEP2
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    I think a reform of the weight divisions is a good idea. These divisions were created when the average man/boxer was smaller. Why should it be that we have some 15 divisions for guys below 200lbs and only one above it? I think its a mistake to chisel these weight classes in stone. We could still have roughly the same number of divisions but have them distributed more evenly over the weight range of fighters. This would make more sense and reflect the original purpose of weight classes - to match up boxers of relatively equal size to make for competitive matches. This original purpose has been defeated when fighters are over 200lbs. Now we can have boxers weighing 205lbs fighting opponents weighing 245lbs. Though there are exceptions like Louis and Baer, size does generally matter.

  6. #6
    gregbeyer
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    never gonna work steve...that would mean some of these heavyweights would have to make weight...hell they might even have to get into shape for a fight. suddenly you would have guys that were fighting at 240 working themselves down to 210 and actually able to fight hard for 12 rounds...then they would cream the slobs in the youv'egottobekidding abe simon jess williard class which of course would force them on life threatening diets and training regimens.....apacolyptic chaos.....are you trying to confuse the world of boxing????:smokin
    greg

  7. #7
    Hagler04
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    It's not just old examples of Dempsey and Louis.

    There are MANY examples of smaller HWs beating giant sized HWs with considerable weight advantages.

    Was Davaryl Williamson at 210 being treated unfairly when he fought the 300 lb Corey Sanders and knocked him out? How about 205 Andre Purlette who obliterated a 280 lb Lionel Butler? Moving up in class, was 218 lb Calvin Brock facing the corruption of modern day weight classes when he whupped the 265 lb Jameel McCline? Or 220 lb Luan Krasniqi who KO'd 253 lbed Lance Whitaker? or Guinn who whupped on the behemoth Grant and Dokiwari but lost to 6'2 215er Monte Barrett or everyone's favorite fat middleweight James Toney, who with a pot-belly (and don't tell me that helps him) has hardly lost a round so far at heavyweight. Another former middleweight (Chris Byrd) is champ and with Vitali gone is considered by many the top HW in the world, and his frame isn't even that of a man 200 lbs.

    I could go on and on. The facts speak for themselves. Another division would be complete crap.

  8. #8
    neellik
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    Steve,

    I hope you were joking. We need fewer not more weight divisions in an already watered down boxing universe. Iím afraid some of the bandit raking organizations might have already seen your post and are now creating the Intermediate Heavyweight Division. Of course the WBC, WBA, IBF and IBO will all have different contenders meeting to decide who the new crowned champion will be. Don King will immediately announce his plan to unify the titles. Three weeks after this unification bout, the new champ will be stripped of his title for not fighting 4 different mandatory challengers in the same weekend.

    Austin

  9. #9
    BDeskins
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    What we need is the elimination of around eight divisions...I could live with nine, probably even ten divisions, but a division every 3, or 5 pounds is simply ridiucouls...hell, people could gain five pounds in their feet, which may be noticable, but five pounds one way, or the other is nothing to make new divisions for! And with the state of how pathetic the heavyweight division is there isn't enough good competition to merit another, heavuer division...all that would do is give belts and the label of champion to fighters that really should not be getting that kind of praise...it would be just another way to praise and award and even lower standard of mediocrity than what already exsists boxing!

  10. #10
    Walker Smith
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    I say keep the heavyweights, light-heavyweights, middleweights all the way through to the jr. featherweights, the bantamweights, flyweights and strawweights. Everything else is not needed. I believe the really low weights have been hurt the most by an excess of divisions, specifically the flyweights. It would really help that division a million if the divisions around it weren't snatching up the talent. I know a couple of pounds at those weights is a big deal and all, but with that many divisions at a weight that has enough problems drawing fans as it doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. There should be plain and simply a flyweight division. Forget about the jr. bantam and jr. flyweight. Same goes for the bantamweight.

    I know most people would say that the featherweights could do without the 122 division, but I disagree. There is a lot of talent to sustain featherweight as it is. 122 also still produces good fights.

  11. #11
    neellik
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    BDeskins,

    I couldn't agree with you more! Miguel Cotto fights as a Junior Welterweight but gets in the ring at 158 lbs. That's a joke. If your weight is 140 lbs. fight at Welterweight or Lightweight. From Flyweight to Featherweight is a total of 14 lbs with 5 weight divisions. This serves only one purpose, sanctioning fees of the WBA, IBF, etc. The Middleweight Division has a great history, but now is a joke. Other than the participants in tonightís fight, name ever 3 worthy contenders at 160 lbs. In the 40's, 50's and 60's being ranked in the top ten meant something, today it's an embarrassment. With 8 divisions there would be quality contenders for each champion to fight. Boxing would be exciting and not a series of mismatches.

    Austin

  12. #12
    ShawnTheBleeder
    Guest

    Re: Super DreadNaught

    I can't stand all the divisions, and the fact that fighters can fight in two seperate division, depending on how much many they want to make or what fight becomes available. My brain can't keep track of 250 boxers sliding up and down the divisions like a stripper on the pole.

    Here's my idea, strip it down to 8 divisions. If a fighter grows out of his weight division after the age of 30, he has to retire. (OK, that's ridiculous. But I'm sticking to it.)
    Shawn

  13. #13
    Steve McV
    Guest

    Re: Weight Divisions

    Gentlemen, I appreciate your remarks, and as I said, I knew my idea would cause groans from old time fight fans.

    But consider: let's take the middleweight division as it used to be, OK? That is, 147 to 160 pounds, a spread of 13 pounds. Simple math; 13 is less than 10% of 160.

    The light heavies, as originally intended; 160 to 175 pounds. Again, the difference, or the range, is less than 10%. This holds true for all the old weight divisions as they were originally created.

    But 200 pounds vs. 240 pounds? Guys, that ain't 10%. That's a 25% difference. Proportionately speaking, it's a big jump.

    Now, no, of course size is not everything in boxing. It's not everything even if we restrict the conversation to hitting power. But why in the world dump the percentages that seem to define the smaller weights classes when we get past 195 pounds? Are you sure there's truth in the thought that past a certain weight, the proportions don't matter? Okay, yeah, the bigger guys tend to be slower, and God knows there's been guys in the 190-210 weight range who could hit a ton and annhilate bigger men. We've all seen it, we cheer when it happens. But what about the guys who aren't super sluggers? Skill being equal, doesn't that difference of a greater weight, especially when we're talking 40 pounds or more, constitute an unfair advantage? To quote John Madden, "Fast guys get tired, big guys don't shrink."

    Again, the traditional weight classes made it that no one would be fighting someone who was 10% heavier than he was. Granted, modern boxers have found ways around that. That still doesn't rob me of my question, however; why drop that 10% limit once we get past 195 pounds?

    Do you think that establishing a Super Heavyewight or Dreadnought class (or whatever they would call it) would hurt boxing? Okay, tradtitionally, the "heavyweight champ" is king of the hill, so establish a weight class between 195 and 210 or 215 or 220, whatever weight is agreed on, and call it something else! Make "heavyweight" mean the guys bigger than that.

    That's my beef. 200 pound guys fighting 240 or 250 pounders. It just seems unfair. The under 10% limit makes a lot more sense to me.

  14. #14
    Roberto Aqui
    Guest

    Strawman

    [[[But 200 pounds vs. 240 pounds?]]]]
    ==============================

    200 lb fighters have their own division called Cruiserweight. A 205-210lb fighter can easily make the cruiser limit if he wants to go that route.

  15. #15
    neellik
    Guest

    Re: Weight Divisions

    Steve,

    Although all your points are valid regarding weight, adding one more division only contributes to the already water downed quality that we have to endure. The Cruiserweight division can probably be justified considering how big heavyweights have become. However we have to get rid of all the super and junior divisions before adding any more.

    Austin

  16. #16
    Cojimar 1945
    Guest

    smaller guys

    Guys who were middleweights have beaten large heavyweights in the past. If your going to use an arguement about little guys beating bigger guys than the heavyweight division should start below 160 lb.

  17. #17
    neellik
    Guest

    Re: smaller guys

    Cojumar 1945,

    Meaning no disrespect but could you name one middleweight fighting at 160 lbs or less, who has beaten a ranked heavyweight?

    Austin

  18. #18
    Hagler04
    Guest

    Re: smaller guys

    Micky Walker at 168 beat Bearcat Wright, a very thickly built avoided black heavyweight, who I'm sure could beat quite a few top teners today.

    I've seen MANY TIMES welterweights not only hold their own, but put a whupping on 220 lbers in sparring.

    most of the HWS above 220 are not that big b/c of their frame . . .they are simply overweight. I just saw some fights from suppodsedly the next great Euro-HW Povetkin, and it was a joke. The guy just turned pro and at 6'1, 225 looks softer then my mom. And time has shown the guys who are proportionatly bigger (Whitaker, McCline, Long, Grant) can and do get whupped on by smaller heavyweights. So how is this unfair again? Guys that big are disadvantaged in terms of balance, foot placement, size of the target, and stamina. In boxing, those are BIGGIES.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia Links Home