Super-middleweight no more necessary than bridgerweight

**N/A** · 01-01-2024, 06:16 AM

Many of those weight classes that differ with around 1.5 to 2.5 kg. are unnecessary. And I am repeating it again: most of them are heavily obsolete.

**Lance98** · 01-01-2024, 06:54 AM

If you take out SMW, many MWs would get demolished and badly hurt by the top guys in SMW. Many MWs are nowhere as big and lengthy as benavidez, morell jr, etc...

**deathofaclown** · 01-01-2024, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by dan-b

Super-middleweight has served only to dilute the sport further. Imagine how much less crying about Canelo there would be without it? He would either be forced to stay at 160 or, having lost to Bivol, attempt to regain credibility against Beterbiev and probably get knocked out. Career over.

Going back further, Calzaghe would not have been able to hide behind the least prestigious belt in a wasteland division. He would either have been forced to fight Hopkins at 160 much sooner or face prime Jones at 175. Ditto for Sven Ottke.

Hopkins turned down Calzaghe a while before they ever fought, first accepting an offer then coming back asking for double after realising it was a difficult fight. Calzaghe was too high risk and low reward at the time.

But the general point I agree with by why limit it to 168?

Why not just have feather, welter, middle etc, and drop all the middle ground? Look at the lower weights, is it necessary to have 3 weight divisions between the space of 6lbs (112-115-118). I don't think so, especially when fighters like Inoue and others before him can tear through them divisions for fun, the tiny few pounds difference seems irrelevant to them. Inoue could weigh in at the bantamweight limit and still whoop the super bantamweights because the tiny increase is meaningless. It would be better to just make it all one bantamweight division between 115-122

Obviously thats never gonna happen, too much money to be made from all the belts, but I think it would be better over all. It doesn't seem to hurt the UFC does it? And it often forces fighters to take the best fights because there would be more better fighters per division.

**dan-b** · 01-01-2024, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Lance98

If you take out SMW, many MWs would get demolished and badly hurt by the top guys in SMW. Many MWs are nowhere as big and lengthy as benavidez, morell jr, etc...

That's the point: stay at 160.

**Apollo7** · 01-01-2024, 12:17 PM

I honestly don't think things would be any better. People would likely still moan about Canelo if he stayed at 160. Why wouldn't they?

Calzaghe probably still would have faced weak opposition, just without a belt or could have got a belt avoided and still not fought prime Jones Jr � la Michalczewski.

**ShoulderRoll** · 01-01-2024, 12:51 PM

I agree, actually.

The Euros encouraged its growth as it allowed them to claim world champions at a time when they otherwise had difficulty doing so at 160 and 175 lbs. And now they complain because Canelo unified it.

**_Rexy_** · 01-01-2024, 01:21 PM

I've been saying this for years. 168 is a British division that guys will stop by for a cup of coffee between 160 and 175.

WBC created the division so SRL could get another title while weight draining Donny Lalonde.

**_Rexy_** · 01-01-2024, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by Lance98

If you take out SMW, many MWs would get demolished and badly hurt by the top guys in SMW. Many MWs are nowhere as big and lengthy as benavidez, morell jr, etc...

Then stay at 160, and if you can't make the weight, 175 for you.

**_Rexy_** · 01-01-2024, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Apollo7

I honestly don't think things would be any better. People would likely still moan about Canelo if he stayed at 160. Why wouldn't they?

Calzaghe probably still would have faced weak opposition, just without a belt or could have got a belt avoided and still not fought prime Jones Jr � la Michalczewski.

Canelo can't make 160. He'd have to fight at 175.

Super-middleweight no more necessary than bridgerweight