3

In boxing and in wrestling, only the upper weight limit is given in Wikipedia and other sources that I have found. This would mean that a flyweight fighter can compete in the heavyweight division and not vice versa. Is it actually legal that a flyweight fighter be allowed to fight in heavyweight division in boxing or wrestling?

Shankhadeep Ghoshal
  • 131
  • 3
  • For boxing, see https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/13923/what-is-the-minimum-weight-to-box-at-a-specific-weight-class – mattm Jan 02 '18 at 15:17

2 Answers2

4

According to the Canadian Amateur Wrestling Association, which I think follows the same rules as the Olympics:

A wrestler can choose to compete in the next higher weight class, except for the heaviest weight class, where the wrestler must weigh the minimum weight listed in this rulebook. The decision to change a weight class cannot be made after the wrestler has already weighed in and the athlete has officially been entered on the weigh-in sheet for a particular weight class.

Source (pdf)

slugster
  • 7,855
  • 3
  • 31
  • 51
Tyler
  • 141
  • 4
-3

Not true. A fighter can legally only fight someone in the same weight class. So every division has a minimum even if it is not stated. A fly weight cannot fight a middle weight on normal circumstances. Middle weight fight middle weights, heavy weights fight only heavy weights. This also implies size matters in a sports fight setting. The stronger one will win of the skill sets are really close enough.

Logikal
  • 404
  • 2
  • 4
  • 1
    This would be improved by a reference, otherwise it is just hear-say. – Sardathrion - against SE abuse Jan 02 '18 at 21:39
  • I suggest you use another word ! My answer clearly states all weight classes have a minimum and maximum which is what a weight class means in the first place. – Logikal Jan 02 '18 at 21:42
  • So what you are saying is if there is no reference there can be no truth? This is absurd and irrational. Prove my claim incorrect. You can Google what defines reach weight class that makes them different. My answer is spot on by definition alone. The same way you can define a triangle as a shape with only three sides . – Logikal Jan 03 '18 at 14:11
  • 1
    I am afraid you misunderstood my comments. I do not care whatsoever whether your statement is correct or not. I care about the quality of this site. Answers that are just hear say make this site worst. If it is trivially easy to add a reference, then please do so. I strongly suggest you looked up the [help] to see how this site works. – Sardathrion - against SE abuse Jan 03 '18 at 14:27
  • 2
    The definition of a weight class does not include a minimum weight for all organizations. For example, Roy Jones Jr. won the heavyweight title (200+lb) while weighing in at 193 lb. – mattm Jan 03 '18 at 15:50
  • Nonsense. A simple Google search will tell you Roy Jones had to move up in weight for that fight to take place. Many fighters gain weight after the official weigh in. In some case after the weigh in fighters might lose 2 to 4 pounds come fight night. – Logikal Jan 03 '18 at 15:58
  • 2
    Roy Jones Jr. moved up in weight classes, but HE WEIGHED IN AT 193 POUNDS. At that weight, boxers are not normally in the heavyweight class. The cruiserweight/junior-heavyweight max weight is 200 pounds. – mattm Jan 03 '18 at 16:16
  • In 1920 the heavyweight class was defined as 175 and up. 1980the rules changed in 1980 according to wiki. Muhammad Ali fought many times below 200. – Logikal Jan 03 '18 at 16:28
  • 1
    Roy Jones Jr. fought Ruiz, weighing in at 193 pounds for a heavyweight fight in 2003, which is after the establishment of the 1980 establishment of the cruiserweight class (200 lb). – mattm Jan 03 '18 at 16:42
  • 1
    What I want is some solid reference which says something about the upper limit. I checked Wikipedia and there is no mention of any upper limit. Is it safe to assume that the lower limit of a division is the upper limit of the division below it? Here is my source for boxing. I saw similar results for wrestling as well. – Shankhadeep Ghoshal Jan 03 '18 at 17:05
  • Because wiki does not list anything does not mean there is nothing in reality. Your sources can be flawed so references do t always prove anything in reality. It proves it has been discussed before. – Logikal Jan 03 '18 at 18:17