Re-structuring weight classes.

[BlackCowboy]

Hi,boys.As a way of-far-fetched as this may read-reducing the number,if not sanctioning organizations,I've come up with these ii weight classes:
1.Paperweight:104 lb.(which would admittedly be superfluous here in North A-
merica,if heavily peopled in Latin America and Asia.)
2.Strawweight:112 lb.
3.Flyweight:120 lb.
4.Bantamweight:128 lb.
5.Featherweight:140 lb.
6.Lightweight:154 lb.
7.Welterweight:168 lb.
8.Middleweight:184 lb.
9.Light-heavyweight:200 lb.
10.Cruiserweight:224 lb.
11.Heavyweight;224+lb.
How 'bout it,lads?(and lasses?)

[dans]

There needs to be 135, I don't care what you call it.

[Pullcounter]

Hi,boys.As a way of-far-fetched as this may read-reducing the number,if not sanctioning organizations,I've come up with these ii weight classes:
1.Paperweight:104 lb.(which would admittedly be superfluous here in North A-
merica,if heavily peopled in Latin America and Asia.)
2.Strawweight:112 lb.
3.Flyweight:120 lb.
4.Bantamweight:128 lb.
5.Featherweight:140 lb.
6.Lightweight:154 lb.
7.Welterweight:168 lb.
8.Middleweight:184 lb.
9.Light-heavyweight:200 lb.
10.Cruiserweight:224 lb.
11.Heavyweight;224+lb.
How 'bout it,lads?(and lasses?)

1) why restructure the weight classes?

2) why not just go back to the original weight classes?

[elfag]

1) why restructure the weight classes?

Yeah theres no reason to move them all around when all you are really doing is renaming them and moving cruiser up to 224.

The classes should be kept the same for historical reasons. Theres no reason to rename middleweights welterweight ect.

[P.WILL]

i think they should combine 105 and 108 everything else in okay