View Full Version : Making and Choosing Weight


Boxjump
07-31-2011, 01:13 PM
Hi all,

So I am 6'1, 180 with hardly any fat and quite muscled.

I've been told by a few trainers that when I fight pro (haven't yet) they would want me at 160 because of my height, reach and power.

However, how on earth would I get down to 160 period!? And if I did there is no way i'd have the same power that I do at 180 right?

So, pro's and con's of fighting at 160 and at 175 and how could I even get to 160?

Thanks for advice in advance...

Boxjump
08-02-2011, 01:51 AM
Ok so here's another question...

What factors determine whether a boxer should fight at 175 or 160?

Clegg
08-02-2011, 05:12 AM
I'm not sure what you training is like, but I think almost anyone can drain themselves a bit to make weight and then put it back on before the fight, so 175 should be easy enough for you.

IDK about 160, 6'1 is tall for a MW, Pavlik, Taylor and Hopkins are that height but only made it with world-class professionals working with them plus a full training camp, which 99% of boxers don't have. Maybe you could make it, hard to say without knowing your diet (because if it's bad then maybe you could improve it to help with weight loss) and fat %.

Did you ask your coaches?

ChowAce
08-02-2011, 06:19 AM
Yea I would say 175 is probably your best bet. Just follow a strict diet and see what happens with your weight. Your body will tell you whether or not cutting more weight is a good thing.

paulsinghnl
08-02-2011, 01:49 PM
i think i'd read up a lot on cutting weight and all that. but the most important thing TO ME is that with cutting weight, you also drain a lot of fluids from around your head and brain, which can cause more serious brain injuries.

so my advice: the closer to natural weight, the better, screw what the rest have to say.

esex
08-02-2011, 02:04 PM
Hi all,

So I am 6'1, 180 with hardly any fat and quite muscled.

I've been told by a few trainers that when I fight pro (haven't yet) they would want me at 160 because of my height, reach and power.

However, how on earth would I get down to 160 period!? And if I did there is no way i'd have the same power that I do at 180 right?

So, pro's and con's of fighting at 160 and at 175 and how could I even get to 160?

Thanks for advice in advance...
160 sounds hazardous to your health , but 168 might be attainable via measured dieting and dehydration come weigh-in .
175 will be hazardous for your health due to the big men you're gonna fight , and you won't be as dangerous for them.
Therefore , I'd recommend you 168.

Clegg
08-02-2011, 02:11 PM
i think i'd read up a lot on cutting weight and all that. but the most important thing TO ME is that with cutting weight, you also drain a lot of fluids from around your head and brain, which can cause more serious brain injuries.

so my advice: the closer to natural weight, the better, screw what the rest have to say.

Yeah, I think cutting down weight to be as big as possible in your division is a dangerous approach. It can work but it can also go wrong.

Mayweather and Pacquiao have been smaller than most of their opponents on the past few years and they're seen as the best in the sport. Martinez hasn't been bigger than anyone he's fought in his most impressive wins. Carl Froch claims that he is at fighting weight weeks before he steps into the ring, and he's known for his durability and stamina.

Obviously size has helped boxers on lots of occassions, but it sometimes it's a bad idea to do things that way.

Another thing for the OP to consider is whether or not being the taller man suits his style. If he likes to fight on the inside and isn't skilled at keeping people on the end of his jab, then he may do better against people his own size/slightly bigger rather than against shorter opposition.

paulsinghnl
08-02-2011, 05:27 PM
160 sounds hazardous to your health , but 168 might be attainable via measured dieting and dehydration come weigh-in .
175 will be hazardous for your health due to the big men you're gonna fight , and you won't be as dangerous for them.
Therefore , I'd recommend you 168.

if the opponents are stronger, you can adapt your style to that.

paulsinghnl
08-02-2011, 05:28 PM
Yeah, I think cutting down weight to be as big as possible in your division is a dangerous approach. It can work but it can also go wrong.

Mayweather and Pacquiao have been smaller than most of their opponents on the past few years and they're seen as the best in the sport. Martinez hasn't been bigger than anyone he's fought in his most impressive wins. Carl Froch claims that he is at fighting weight weeks before he steps into the ring, and he's known for his durability and stamina.

Obviously size has helped boxers on lots of occassions, but it sometimes it's a bad idea to do things that way.

Another thing for the OP to consider is whether or not being the taller man suits his style. If he likes to fight on the inside and isn't skilled at keeping people on the end of his jab, then he may do better against people his own size/slightly bigger rather than against shorter opposition.

yup true, you're gonna have to adapt to the weight class, work on your style etc.

ghns1133
08-02-2011, 07:12 PM
if u r 180 as a pro, with the weigh in the day before....

u could probably make 168 easy and on fight night hydrate back up to 180...

cant tell u what u should make but i dont think 160 is a completly out there.