weighting up or down to a division?
i don't remember what i was watching the other night (related to boxing) and was wondering what's easier for a fighter or harder. considering every aspect from what they eat to how they would perform/fight in terms of speed, resistance, punch power, strength, etc.
what is harder/easier?
Moderator: lilfishi22
what is harder/easier?
- BlackMamba
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 16,297
- And1: 81
- Joined: Jun 20, 2004
- Location: Cd. de M
-
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,526
- And1: 10
- Joined: Oct 05, 2007
Re: what is harder/easier?
do you actually have to weigh up to a division?
Know anyone who is disabled? has an addiction?

HandyTax - Your Canadian Disability Tax Credit Consultants
http://www.handytax.ca

HandyTax - Your Canadian Disability Tax Credit Consultants
http://www.handytax.ca
Re: what is harder/easier?
- SpReEfOrAlL
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,330
- And1: 161
- Joined: Jul 29, 2002
- Location: July 2010!
Re: what is harder/easier?
Moving up in weight has to be tough fight difficulty wise. Moving down has to be a strain on your body though.
Re: what is harder/easier?
- CPT
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,307
- And1: 2,777
- Joined: Jan 21, 2002
- Location: Osaka/Seoul/Toronto
-
Re: what is harder/easier?
Not sure about boxing, but in MMA, I generally see people have more success moving down in weight than moving up.
Generally speaking, it's probably best to fight at the lowest weight class you can make without exhausting yourself.
Generally speaking, it's probably best to fight at the lowest weight class you can make without exhausting yourself.
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,556
- And1: 66
- Joined: Apr 08, 2005
- Location: Retire #25
Re: what is harder/easier?
I was chatting about this the other day with a friend.
I think some of it depends what weight you are aswell.
Going up you'd really have to put on muscle, cant just fatten up obviously, and that definatly is a strain because your losing flexability and speed when you do that [can be avoid'd ofcourse, but its not a quick process to say the least].
Going down your dropping as much fat as poss, and gently losing some muscle mass.
I'd love to know what a guy like Penn goes through when swapping weights between events - going from 155 to 170 to fight GSP then back to 155 to defend his title. How he goes about it would tell you alot. Going up to 170 does he just add weight or does he try and add 15 pounds of muscle, and then what does he do to lose it afterwards.
Also you dont walk around at 155 [for E.G] you cut to that [or 156], so you dont want to just rise to 170, you'd want to rise your "natural" weight well beyond that, without it just being pizza fat.
Once your accustomed to it I imagine its much of a muchness, but for the "first time" I imagine going down is "easier", going up is trickier, because you have to think about where you can cut to/from with the changes in your heavier weight - also the toll that your body is carrying around more weight than it would usually, plus the slight increase I imagine in diet.
Good question though.
I think some of it depends what weight you are aswell.
Going up you'd really have to put on muscle, cant just fatten up obviously, and that definatly is a strain because your losing flexability and speed when you do that [can be avoid'd ofcourse, but its not a quick process to say the least].
Going down your dropping as much fat as poss, and gently losing some muscle mass.
I'd love to know what a guy like Penn goes through when swapping weights between events - going from 155 to 170 to fight GSP then back to 155 to defend his title. How he goes about it would tell you alot. Going up to 170 does he just add weight or does he try and add 15 pounds of muscle, and then what does he do to lose it afterwards.
Also you dont walk around at 155 [for E.G] you cut to that [or 156], so you dont want to just rise to 170, you'd want to rise your "natural" weight well beyond that, without it just being pizza fat.
Once your accustomed to it I imagine its much of a muchness, but for the "first time" I imagine going down is "easier", going up is trickier, because you have to think about where you can cut to/from with the changes in your heavier weight - also the toll that your body is carrying around more weight than it would usually, plus the slight increase I imagine in diet.
Good question though.
Re: what is harder/easier?
- CPT
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,307
- And1: 2,777
- Joined: Jan 21, 2002
- Location: Osaka/Seoul/Toronto
-
Re: what is harder/easier?
From what I can tell, BJ will probably only try to put on 5-10 pounds of "good weight" and then just not really cut for the 170 fight.
I think he cuts from maybe 160-165 to make the 155 class, so he'll probably just add on 5-10 pounds and not cut. This will give GSP a huge size advantage, but nothing BJ could do was really going to change that. If he's winning that fight, he's winning on technique.
A guy like Rich Franklin, on the other hand, has put in a lot of work to get big enough for 205, and has no interest in going back down to 185 because of the muscle he's put on. Though I'm sure Anderson Silva has plenty to do with it too. Time will tell if the move up is a good one for him though, as I think he's actually further away from the title at 205 than he is at 185. Even the Henderson fight won't be a really good test, as Hendo is a guy that goes between 185 and 205 himself.
Going the other way, Mike Swick has said that when he used to fight at MW, he didn't cut any weight, and often weighed in at 183 or 184, giving up a lot of size. Now that he fights at WW, he probably only lost a few pounds from his walking around weight, and now he cuts down to 170 and looks pretty good there.
I think he cuts from maybe 160-165 to make the 155 class, so he'll probably just add on 5-10 pounds and not cut. This will give GSP a huge size advantage, but nothing BJ could do was really going to change that. If he's winning that fight, he's winning on technique.
A guy like Rich Franklin, on the other hand, has put in a lot of work to get big enough for 205, and has no interest in going back down to 185 because of the muscle he's put on. Though I'm sure Anderson Silva has plenty to do with it too. Time will tell if the move up is a good one for him though, as I think he's actually further away from the title at 205 than he is at 185. Even the Henderson fight won't be a really good test, as Hendo is a guy that goes between 185 and 205 himself.
Going the other way, Mike Swick has said that when he used to fight at MW, he didn't cut any weight, and often weighed in at 183 or 184, giving up a lot of size. Now that he fights at WW, he probably only lost a few pounds from his walking around weight, and now he cuts down to 170 and looks pretty good there.
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,556
- And1: 66
- Joined: Apr 08, 2005
- Location: Retire #25
Re: what is harder/easier?
Yeah CPT, alot of good points there.
Its actually quite interesting to see how people fight at the wrong weight. I think alot of it is when people arent in the best gym they can get to, and not with the best nutrionists etc .. there could be a lot of "confusion" so to speak about their weight and whats best.
Going back to TUF you see guys like Kenny Florian fighting at 185 in the first season, and he's a 155 guy, then someone like Stevenson that went from 170 to 155. [Watched a bit of TUF1 the other day found it hilarious in one scene about cutting weight, Kenflo just says under his breathe "i dont need to worry" stuffing his face with cake, probably the only way he could stay at 185 lol]
But I think the key point you make cpt in there is about the size - going up if your just "going up" and werent cutting huge ammounts of weight, your probably going to have a tough time with size.
I was introducing my friend to UFC the other day and was talking about how if you fight at MW you really should be 186 on weigh in, 185 if you "went a bit far". [In a very basic explanation].
Its actually quite interesting to see how people fight at the wrong weight. I think alot of it is when people arent in the best gym they can get to, and not with the best nutrionists etc .. there could be a lot of "confusion" so to speak about their weight and whats best.
Going back to TUF you see guys like Kenny Florian fighting at 185 in the first season, and he's a 155 guy, then someone like Stevenson that went from 170 to 155. [Watched a bit of TUF1 the other day found it hilarious in one scene about cutting weight, Kenflo just says under his breathe "i dont need to worry" stuffing his face with cake, probably the only way he could stay at 185 lol]
But I think the key point you make cpt in there is about the size - going up if your just "going up" and werent cutting huge ammounts of weight, your probably going to have a tough time with size.
I was introducing my friend to UFC the other day and was talking about how if you fight at MW you really should be 186 on weigh in, 185 if you "went a bit far". [In a very basic explanation].
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- On Leave
- Posts: 42,080
- And1: 9,763
- Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Re: what is harder/easier?
In boxing it is generally not a good idea to move down compared to moving up. In fact the only guy who has had recent success going down in weight and winning a championship is Nonito Doniare and the difference in weight was just 3 lbs in the sub featherweight classes.
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 8,556
- And1: 66
- Joined: Apr 08, 2005
- Location: Retire #25
Re: what is harder/easier?
Blame Rasho wrote:In boxing it is generally not a good idea to move down compared to moving up. In fact the only guy who has had recent success going down in weight and winning a championship is Nonito Doniare and the difference in weight was just 3 lbs in the sub featherweight classes.
How come? I would have thought with more weight class's, dropping would be as much and theres the possibility for size advantage? Or is it just the dynamics of boxing it self doesnt lend itself as well?
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- On Leave
- Posts: 42,080
- And1: 9,763
- Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Re: what is harder/easier?
damo[23] wrote:Blame Rasho wrote:In boxing it is generally not a good idea to move down compared to moving up. In fact the only guy who has had recent success going down in weight and winning a championship is Nonito Doniare and the difference in weight was just 3 lbs in the sub featherweight classes.
How come? I would have thought with more weight class's, dropping would be as much and theres the possibility for size advantage? Or is it just the dynamics of boxing it self doesnt lend itself as well?
I think it is just the dynamics of boxing. Boxers fight at weight classes that are never near their natural weight. You look at the Oscar fight vs Manny and you can see how bad he looked from all the weight loss. This was a guy that basically a year ago stood toe to toe with the best pound for pound fighter at 154 and then was totally sapped when he had to make the welterweight(147) limit. He couldn't even retain fluids.
You look around in boxing and you see that fighters for the most part have significantly success going up in weight than going down due to the fact that they starve themselves to make the present weight class that they are in.
I don't think MMA has this problem. Their fighters don't have to cut as drastically or extremely like boxers to make weight due to the fact that they are for the most part near the natural weight when they are not in training. Anderson Silva is a good example of this in my opinion.
Re: what is harder/easier?
- CPT
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 14,307
- And1: 2,777
- Joined: Jan 21, 2002
- Location: Osaka/Seoul/Toronto
-
Re: what is harder/easier?
How much would a boxer who weighs in at 170 generally weigh on the day of the fight?
I'd be surprised to hear they cut more weight than guys like GSP, Sherk, Marquardt, etc. I'd say the average UFC fighter is about 10 lbs heavier in the octagon than at the weigh in. A lot of the guys are said to be a good 20 pounds heavier, especially in the higher weight classes.
Is the cut really that drastic in boxing?
Or are you just saying that guys maintain a lower weight than their frame can handle at all times, not necessarily cutting a huge amount of weight?
I'd also say that going down in weight doesn't work as well in boxing because of the premium on speed/agility in boxing, but that's just an uneducated guess.
I'd be surprised to hear they cut more weight than guys like GSP, Sherk, Marquardt, etc. I'd say the average UFC fighter is about 10 lbs heavier in the octagon than at the weigh in. A lot of the guys are said to be a good 20 pounds heavier, especially in the higher weight classes.
Is the cut really that drastic in boxing?
Or are you just saying that guys maintain a lower weight than their frame can handle at all times, not necessarily cutting a huge amount of weight?
I'd also say that going down in weight doesn't work as well in boxing because of the premium on speed/agility in boxing, but that's just an uneducated guess.
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- On Leave
- Posts: 42,080
- And1: 9,763
- Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Re: what is harder/easier?
Yeah it is....
One of the things I hate about boxing is the weigh in before the fight. It is unsafe and puts them in danger. The old school days you fought the day of the weigh in.
Let me give you some examples..
Ricky Hatton fights at 140 but when he is not fighting is a fatass because he gets up to 180 in a 5'6 frame. He is a very big guy for his weight class.
Emmanuel Cottley weighed in at 147 and then rehydrated himself to 165 the day of the fight when he fought Corales. That is around 12% of his weight. Anyways... He crushed Corales that fight.
There isn't really a 170 weight class but they do have a 175 weight class and fighters in that weight class for the most part rehydrate 15 to 18 lbs. I think Tomaz Adamak is a good example when he fought Chad Dawson, He walked in at 190. In fact he just won THE cruiserweight(200 lbs) title not to long ago and that is the biggest jump in weight classes in boxing.
It isn't really a problem with the heavier weight classes but in the sub middleweight weight classes it becomes a significant issue. You can't have fighters getting back like 10% of their weight back in one night. It isn't good long term to fluctuate so much before a fight and in fact there have been studies that have said that you are more likely to have significant injuries long term... I.E dementia, Alzheimer, slurred speech.
You are correct. The fighters who go down in weight lose most of their quickness while marginally maintaining/regaining their power. You look at Roy Jones Jr after he won the Heavyweight title and he was never the same. He lost alot of his zap in his punches.
One of the things I hate about boxing is the weigh in before the fight. It is unsafe and puts them in danger. The old school days you fought the day of the weigh in.
Let me give you some examples..
Ricky Hatton fights at 140 but when he is not fighting is a fatass because he gets up to 180 in a 5'6 frame. He is a very big guy for his weight class.
Emmanuel Cottley weighed in at 147 and then rehydrated himself to 165 the day of the fight when he fought Corales. That is around 12% of his weight. Anyways... He crushed Corales that fight.
There isn't really a 170 weight class but they do have a 175 weight class and fighters in that weight class for the most part rehydrate 15 to 18 lbs. I think Tomaz Adamak is a good example when he fought Chad Dawson, He walked in at 190. In fact he just won THE cruiserweight(200 lbs) title not to long ago and that is the biggest jump in weight classes in boxing.
It isn't really a problem with the heavier weight classes but in the sub middleweight weight classes it becomes a significant issue. You can't have fighters getting back like 10% of their weight back in one night. It isn't good long term to fluctuate so much before a fight and in fact there have been studies that have said that you are more likely to have significant injuries long term... I.E dementia, Alzheimer, slurred speech.
You are correct. The fighters who go down in weight lose most of their quickness while marginally maintaining/regaining their power. You look at Roy Jones Jr after he won the Heavyweight title and he was never the same. He lost alot of his zap in his punches.
Re: what is harder/easier?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,882
- And1: 25
- Joined: Oct 09, 2007
- Location: L.A.
Re: what is harder/easier?
Going down BLOWS! In a sub-grappling matches you weigh in about a hour before the match, I once cut 6 lbs in a day and hit the mat. I won my 1st match and gassed within 2 minutes of my 2nd, it got so bad I pulled gaurd which is not my game. My 3rd was for a medal and I tried to forfeit because I was so gassed. Luckily they refused to let me quit so I basically got the takedown and laid on the dude for the remaining time. I never felt so tired in my life. Dudes I beat were all talking smack to after for laying on them it was a very lame showing on my part.

Return to Boxing & Mixed Martial Arts