Comments Thread For: Thank You, Oleksandr Usyk, for Eviscerating the Bridgerweight Concept

[-Kev-]

He really didn’t, he’s just that great. His individual win doesn’t disprove that weight matters in boxing. It matters, that’s why there’s weight classes.

ATG doing never before seen feats doesn’t mean that should be the standard. Pacquiao fighting in 8 weight classes doesn’t mean that now any 108lb fighter can eventually move up to 147 successfully. Mayweather, Calzaghe, and Marciano retiring undefeated doesn’t mean that’s the new standard for greatness. Lomachenko winning a title in his second fight doesn’t make that the standard.

[Echo Falls]

Fridgerweight just another belt for more fees.

That’s a belt solely for Jarrell Miller.

[The Big Dunn]

Fully agree with this. F*** Bridgerweight.

Yeah but Usyk looks to be an ATG. He was also outweighed by 40lbs.

some of these fights would have almost double that.

[juggernaut666]

He really didn’t, he’s just that great. His individual win doesn’t disprove that weight matters in boxing. It matters, that’s why there’s weight classes.

ATG doing never before seen feats doesn’t mean that should be the standard. Pacquiao fighting in 8 weight classes doesn’t mean that now any 108lb fighter can eventually move up to 147 successfully. Mayweather, Calzaghe, and Marciano retiring undefeated doesn’t mean that’s the new standard for greatness. Lomachenko winning a title in his second fight doesn’t make that the standard.

If we went by the articles logic , everyone would still be averaging 5”11 at heavyweight because Mike Tyson paved the way and showed being tall isn’t going to work much ,they’d have to get rid of Cruiserweight and light heavyweight and just condense them in the heavyweight class because of Mike Tyson as the standard back in the day . Lol

[Monty Fisto]

Raskin says "not necessary" an then quotes a dozen examples where lighter HWs prevailed over much heavier guys. That would be fine if it had happened over the last 10-15 years but he shoots his own argument in the foot by quoting examples from 1919 - 105 YEARS AGO FFS

In short much smaller HWs dominating much larger HWs is not a common occurrence. Why fight the logic. We're always told there's weight classes for a reason and weight and reach are meaningful measurements. Now you're saying that doesn't count at HW but is true of all other weight classes? Give your head a wobble Eric Raskin.
'2
I propose something a bit more interesting. Handicapping of fighters. Happens wwith horses - why not fighters? Lets say Fury's 40lb heavier weight is deemed an advantage. Not many wouldd disagree with this judging by how many were advising him to just lean on Usyk and tire him out. So given that he has a perceived advantage then calculate how much of an avantage. Handicap him a point or points in the fight.

Ryyan Garcia came in 3 lbs overweight - ? Handicap him a point etc.

The worst thing about Bridgerweight class is the name. Keep HWs and anything above 250 is Fat Bassstard weight

Quoting Ryan Garcia as an example to back your argument for handicapping is picking a ridiculous outlier that shouldn't have any bearing on a sensible discussion of weight classes. Garcia ignored the weight limit for the fight and (to boot) tested positive for PEDs. The fight shouldn't have gone ahead.

Citing fighters from 1919 to illustrate a century of evidence is not shooting the argument in the foot, it is doing what it says on the tin.

As for small HWs. You may say it is not a common occurrence, but it is not a fleetingly insignificant thing. Make a list of the significant heavyweights through history, and many of them were not that big for their era. Rocky Marciano, Flloyd Patterson, Joe Frazier, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield. Even in the modern 'giant' era, you had the 6'2" Hassim Rahman knocking out ATG Lennox Lewis. Deontay Wilder was tall but not heavy and did not lack for power. And we have Olyksander Usyk.

We do have weight classes for a reason. And that reason is that for small men a few pounds makes a big difference. I maintain it is far less significant at the HW division.

[StephenM]

I just don't understand the logic of all the weight classes and then all of a sudden when you hit 201 pounds weight doesn't matter any more. Small heavyweights can beat big heavyweights. Sure. A small welter weight can beat a big junior middleweight: should we do away with welterweight?

[DeeMoney]

I just don't understand the logic of all the weight classes and then all of a sudden when you hit 201 pounds weight doesn't matter any more. Small heavyweights can beat big heavyweights. Sure. A small welter weight can beat a big junior middleweight: should we do away with welterweight?

I'm glad to read that most people recognize this as such. Picking out several examples of smaller heavyweights winning doesnt negate size as a factor in heavyweight boxing, and it doesnt mean there is some magical weight that we all should strive for. There are advantages to carrying less weight, mainly endurance related. However there are advantages to having more size: reach, greater possibilities for strength, etc.

Just because a more skilled smaller fighter beat a larger fighter, doesnt mean these things don't exist.

[Cyborg Fangerloo]

No strong opinions BUT we should all be pumped for June 1st.
- Wilder vs all of China - bombs away. Who is going to be knocked out?
- Likely another beautiful boxing display by Bivol
- Hrgo vs Dubois - Hrgo has fought a number of guys with good records, but not a lot of quality competition. Dubois has fought some stiff competition but there is obviously a blueprint to beat him. I imagine this will be a good test for us to see if Hrgo is actually any good.

PUMPED!

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Yeah but Usyk looks to be an ATG. He was also outweighed by 40lbs.

some of these fights would have almost double that.

Yeah Usyk is definitely an exception to the rule, it’s always going to take a special fighter to beat naturally bigger guys at the top level.

[Wacked_Out]

If we went by the articles logic , everyone would still be averaging 5”11 at heavyweight because Mike Tyson paved the way and showed being tall isn’t going to work much ,they’d have to get rid of Cruiserweight and light heavyweight and just condense them in the heavyweight class because of Mike Tyson as the standard back in the day . Lol

You are right. The logic doesnt hold up when you look at it this way. Its kind of ridiculous that the author would take an extreme outlier and use it as a refutation of concept.
Im not sure why some are so opposed to an added weight class. Is it because of tradition that things must remain unchanged? Nothing about the records needs adjusting. I wont ever look back and see Marciano as a LtHvy or Bridgerweight. He fought as a HW he will remain one. Its just adding a new category going forward.
As for the name Bridgerweight, yeah thats Fng lame. I'd change that and Cruiserweight to Bruiserweight and Clobberweight.