Originally posted by daggum
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Moving up in weight: Why the fuss?
Collapse
-
some of these guys take advantage of "ahem" training methods that allow them to boil down to low weights and fight smaller guys when they are young. they're called up in weight because they aren't always fighting guys of their own size. best example is adrien broner. looked like ray robinson at 130 lbs. in 3 years he was at WW and looking like an ordinary fighter.
there's also an inherent appeal of a legitmately great fighter taking on challenges. if a guy is so good that he's untouchable at a weight, won't his fights at a higher weight have some kind of added appeal?
Comment
-
Originally posted by bigdramashow View PostLook at any of his threads and the following theme appears 'GGG has to move up in weight to prove himself'. I always wonder, why is it seen as such a terrible thing to be a dominant champion in one division?
In this age of catchweights, people moving up and down in weight constantly and 4 beltholders, not to mention super and diamond champions, theres a lack of clarity as to who the real champion in most divisions are. Gennady Golovkin has 3 of the belts and is looking to get the 4th belt, this ambition, however appears to be seen as a negative by many on this site.
In my eyes, welterweight, middleweight, light heavyweight and heavyweight are the glamour divisions, and these are the divisions where you talk about all the great fighters, not the junior and super weight categories. So why the demand for a fighter to move up in weight these days? Does clearing out a division and proving you are the best by taking and beating all comers of people who are the same size (the point of weight classes) not prove you as a fighter?
And do people feel its better for example to be a 4 weight world champion in which youve never really dominated a division, or become synonymous with a division by dominating it for a long period of time?
Comment
-
Comment