Miguel Cotto To Get Taxed By WBO, Even if Non-Title

[Dave Rado]

uhm WHAT?

let me make this a bit clearer and not jumble ****ed.

welterweight - 141-147

No there is a maximum limit of 147lb. There is NO minimum limit. For the nth time, the WBO rules are here. Try reading them.

Henry Armstrong only weighed 133lb when he won the Welterweight title, and weighed less that 140 in most of his defences. If you don't believe me, see here.

So there is no range, there is no lower limit, there is only an upper limit, and that upper limit is 147. By specifying a lower upper limit in the contract, it becomes a catchweight fight.

[Dave Rado]

so the clottey fight was not supposed to be for the WW title because cotto came in at 146 lbs.

You're missing the point. The weight they weigh in at is irrelevant, as long as it's not greater than 147. There is no lower limit. There is only an upper limit, and that limit is 147lb They can weigh in at 108lb if they like. Armstrong weighed in at 133lb when he won the Welterweight title. But by changing the upper limit from 147lb, it becomes a catchweight fight.

This is not about either fighter being scared, that's a ridiculous claim - they're both warriors. It's about Cotto making a stand for the integrity of boxing as a sport, and about the WBO and some of Pac's advisers trying to have their cake and eat it. And it's not about which boxer you support. Many Pac fans and some Pinoys, have said they support the stance Cotto has taken, and much respect to them.

[whoelsebutjames]

Ok well while we maintaing the integrity

the real integrity would be to do weighs on the night of the fight..
then the limit would mean a lil more

im sure paq would be fine with him weighing only 147. its the ballooning hes worried bout so lets be serious

[FLY TY]

i was against this **** bein for the title in the beginning.....

but i'm gettin tired of this **** now.

pacqiuao is giving cotto a career payday here, so if miguel wants to stick to his guns to make a point fine. but sign the contract, or officially bow out, cuz it sounds here as if the belt is gonna be on the line regardless, and everyone needs to accept it....SMH

[Dave Rado]

the real integrity would be to do weighs on the night of the fight..
then the limit would mean a lil more

No, because same day weigh-ins were abolished for health reasons, and for all boxers, because they were thought to be a contributory cause to serious brain injuries. The rules were not changed for the sake of a particular fight in order to help a particular fighter win a title - which is what the WBO and Pac's advisers are trying to do in this case.

And you, too, are asking for the rules of boxing to be changed for a single fight in order to help a single fighter to win a title, and to do that would damage the integrity of boxing. You may or may not agree with the rules of boxing, but if they are to be changed, they should be changed for all fights and all fighters, not for a single fight, and not in order to help a particular fighter.

[whoelsebutjames]

Now lets apply a bit of reason...
does same day fights cause health concerns because people are making weights that they probably shouldnt naturally be at...
hmmm..

well these 180 lbs dudes are having trouble making light welterweight and thats the only way hes gone stay undefeated..


ive never been a fan of this day before weigh in where you got fighters ballooning 10 to 15 lbs..

boxing turned into a sissy coward sport whereverybody hides behind rules lame judges and blind refs but never change nothing cause they have to much respect for the history of the sport

[Dave Rado]

ive never been a fan of this day before weigh in ... boxing turned into a sissy coward sport whereverybody hides behind rules lame judges and blind refs but never change nothing cause they have to much respect for the history of the sport

So you think it was wrong for boxing to change its rules to ban same day weigh ins, but in the same post you criticise boxing for never changing its rules, out of respect for the history of the sport - and you don't see any contradiction in what you say?

[whoelsebutjames]

actually i wasnt speaking of changing the rules i was speaking of changing in the manner of applying common sense vs boxing afficianado rhetoric. I meant adapting to things that arent helping the sport.

[versatech]

No, because same day weigh-ins were abolished for health reasons, and for all boxers, because they were thought to be a contributory cause to serious brain injuries. The rules were not changed for the sake of a particular fight in order to help a particular fighter win a title - which is what the WBO and Pac's advisers are trying to do in this case.

And you, too, are asking for the rules of boxing to be changed for a single fight in order to help a single fighter to win a title, and to do that would damage the integrity of boxing. You may or may not agree with the rules of boxing, but if they are to be changed, they should be changed for all fights and all fighters, not for a single fight, and not in order to help a particular fighter.

Simple. Fight the weight you're comfortable with.no one or no rule is forcing a boxer to drain themselves to fight in lower weight division.

[andrtaker]

u know what i just observed from this website.

One agrees, and then the rest follows like hungry vultures