Size...really means little!!

[barry]

This is for all those that like to think that size really makes a big difference...this link will not last long, but here is as good an example of of the "size" argument being a myth as any...George Godfrey and Jack Dempsey sparring...

Now Demspey is considered a rather small heavyweight, but Godfrey, at 6' 3" 230 lbs, is a big heavyweight for any era, yet the size difference is not noticable really at all...and size is not at all the factor that some think it is!

http://www.antekprizering.com/godfreyde ... nedpc.html

[Collins2000]

This is for all those that like to think that size really makes a big difference...this link will not last long, but here is as good an example of of the "size" argument being a myth as any...George Godfrey and Jack Dempsey sparring...

Now Demspey is considered a rather small heavyweight, but Godfrey, at 6' 3" 230 lbs, is a big heavyweight for any era, yet the size difference is not noticable really at all...and size is not at all the factor that some think it is!

http://www.antekprizering.com/godfreyde ... nedpc.html

When all else is equal, then difference in size is of paramount importance, barry. A good little man will often beat mediocre bigger men, But when he meets a bigger man as good as himself...

It's a truism of boxing that "A good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un".

[barry]

>>>It's a truism of boxing that "A good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un". <<<

That's true, but usually there has to be a major size difference, and the statement usually holds true to the lower classes, or when someone like a middleweight, or light heavyweight try to move to heavyweight...it has never really been the case in the heavyweight division for fighters that had always been a heavyweight as often the good little un' beats the good big un' in heavyweight bouts.

[iceman21287]

This is for all those that like to think that size really makes a big difference...this link will not last long, but here is as good an example of of the "size" argument being a myth as any...George Godfrey and Jack Dempsey sparring...

Now Demspey is considered a rather small heavyweight, but Godfrey, at 6' 3" 230 lbs, is a big heavyweight for any era, yet the size difference is not noticable really at all...and size is not at all the factor that some think it is!

http://www.antekprizering.com/godfreyde ... nedpc.html

According to BoxRec, Dempsey stood at 6'1 and had a 77 inch reach. Godfrey stood at 6'3 and had a 79 1/2 inch reach . A 2 inch height advantage and 2 1/2 inch reach advantage is almost negligable to begin with, so I don't see how this proves much of anything. If the fighters are this close in height and reach, the boxer who matches up the best will win, end of story.

[barry]

It isn't the height, it's the weight, Dempsey always came in under 200, Godfrey was almost always 230+. It is weight that is so prominant in todays heavyweight division, not height, or reach.

[Collins2000]

>>>It's a truism of boxing that "A good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un". <<<

That's true, but usually there has to be a major size difference, and the statement usually holds true to the lower classes, or when someone like a middleweight, or light heavyweight try to move to heavyweight...it has never really been the case in the heavyweight division for fighters that had always been a heavyweight as often the good little un' beats the good big un' in heavyweight bouts.

OK, barry, I thought you were referring to weight disparity throughout the various weights not just heavyweight.

If all you are referring to is the heavyweights then I agree. I can easily picture Marciano beating the shite out of Lummox Lewis.

[Seamus]

In regards to the seize argument, on the Boxers of the Past forum, if anything the prevailing belief is that the lighter heavyweights would dominate the larger ones.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

In regards to the seize argument, on the Boxers of the Past forum, if anything the prevailing belief is that the lighter heavyweights would dominate the larger ones.

the question is wut is a large heavyweight??


i mean even the all time great heavies werent that big like some people think



foreman 6'3 217lb- thats small for todays division


holmes 6'3 1/2 208-212lb- thats very small weight wise for todays division


liston 6'1 210-215lb- not big at all for compared to todays


muhammad ali 6'3 201-212lb- another small heavy for todays division





then u got guys like


demspey and marciano who are 185-190lb but i think they would beat the big men of today





sam langford is a proven case that a small skilled heavy can beat a large skilled heavy


langford 5'7 185lb twice knocked out 6'4 220lb harry wills and 5'11 215lb sam mcvey

[Collins2000]

In regards to the seize argument, on the Boxers of the Past forum, if anything the prevailing belief is that the lighter heavyweights would dominate the larger ones.

the question is wut is a large heavyweight??


i mean even the all time great heavies werent that big like some people think



foreman 6'3 217lb- thats small for todays division


holmes 6'3 1/2 208-212lb- thats very small weight wise for todays division


liston 6'1 210-215lb- not big at all for compared to todays


muhammad ali 6'3 201-212lb- another small heavy for todays division





then u got guys like


demspey and marciano who are 185-190lb but i think they would beat the big men of today





sam langford is a proven case that a small skilled heavy can beat a large skilled heavy


langford 5'7 185lb twice knocked out 6'4 220lb harry wills and 5'11 215lb sam mcvey

Yep, and my opinion is that the next great heavyweight champ won't weigh more than 225 pounds in his prime.

[evndrbsn]

This is for all those that like to think that size really makes a big difference...this link will not last long, but here is as good an example of of the "size" argument being a myth as any...George Godfrey and Jack Dempsey sparring...

Now Demspey is considered a rather small heavyweight, but Godfrey, at 6' 3" 230 lbs, is a big heavyweight for any era, yet the size difference is not noticable really at all...and size is not at all the factor that some think it is!

http://www.antekprizering.com/godfreyde ... nedpc.html

Poor example for size not being a factor. Here is an excerpt from the site you used: "But one sparring partner could hold his own, and Dempsey's manager, Jack Kearns, felt he was perhaps a little too good. Fearing Godfrey might injure the rough and tumble Dempsey, Kearns quietly released Godfrey from the camp, rumoring that Dempsey had broken two of Godfrey's ribs. A story few believed."

Sounds like maybe big ol' Godfrey was a bit much for Jack to handle?

[wolverine1]

If that picture is accurate, then Dempsey on the right, appears to have thicker calf muscles, thicker thighs, and bigger shoudlers, and broader chest than Godfrey. How then, is it, that Dempsey would weigh less?

[barry]

See, now that is where you are wrong...Godfrey was a staple of Dempsey sparring camps, in fact it has been mentioned many, many times that Godfrey was Dempsey's favorite sparring partner ever because unlike the others, Godfrey could handle the pounding Dempsey laid on.

[evndrbsn]

See, now that is where you are wrong...Godfrey was a staple of Dempsey sparring camps, in fact it has been mentioned many, many times that Godfrey was Dempsey's favorite sparring partner ever because unlike the others, Godfrey could handle the pounding Dempsey laid on.

So was Godfrey let go or not by Jack Kearns? I was using the information from the site you provided

[barry]

>>>If that picture is accurate, then Dempsey on the right, appears to have thicker calf muscles, thicker thighs, and bigger shoudlers, and broader chest than Godfrey. How then, is it, that Dempsey would weigh less?<<<

That's what I see...Dempsey's legs are just as big, if not bigger than Godfrey's...and there really isn't much different upstairs either...now Dempsey may have been several pounds above his fighting weight at that time, but as the picture shows, you cannot really distinguish the size difference.

[wolverine1]

>>>If that picture is accurate, then Dempsey on the right, appears to have thicker calf muscles, thicker thighs, and bigger shoudlers, and broader chest than Godfrey. How then, is it, that Dempsey would weigh less?<<<

That's what I see...Dempsey's legs are just as big, if not bigger than Godfrey's...and there really isn't much different upstairs either...now Dempsey may have been several pounds above his fighting weight at that time, but as the picture shows, you cannot really distinguish the size difference.

That's true. And I had a moment to think about maybe Dempsey hadn't gotten down to "fighting trim" yet. Didn't Rocky M trim down for his fights by quite a bit too?

[barry]

>>>So was Godfrey let go or not by Jack Kearns? I was using the information from the site you provided<<<

He may have been let go from that camp, I'm not sure, but I do know that he was brought in later and he was always a sparring partner that Dempsey liked very much...I have seen several other pictures of Dempsey and Godfrey together during training camps different than the one pictured.

[evndrbsn]

>>>If that picture is accurate, then Dempsey on the right, appears to have thicker calf muscles, thicker thighs, and bigger shoudlers, and broader chest than Godfrey. How then, is it, that Dempsey would weigh less?<<<

That's what I see...Dempsey's legs are just as big, if not bigger than Godfrey's...and there really isn't much different upstairs either...now Dempsey may have been several pounds above his fighting weight at that time, but as the picture shows, you cannot really distinguish the size difference.

That's true. And I had a moment to think about maybe Dempsey hadn't gotten down to "fighting trim" yet. Didn't Rocky M trim down for his fights by quite a bit too?

Dempsey has got to be well over 210 in that photo. He looks huge compared to his fighting shape.

[barry]

Most all of the earlier fighters always trimmed down from over 200 pounds, which in my opinion gave them the added speed that the lumbering, overweight heavyweights of today do not possess, yet they still had the 200+ pound power and strength, their bodies were just tweaked a little better for 15, or 20 rounds...could you imagine a heavyweight of today having to fight twenty rounds? Hell, I can't imagine the wind-bags of today going fifteen rounds, they have a hard enough time with ten!

[Cojimar 1945]

I believe Foreman was 6'3 1/2 while Holmes was only 6'3. Foreman weighed over 224 lb in some of his fights in the 1970s. From age 23-28 Foreman weighed 214-231 1/2 for bouts with Holmes at 196-213 in the same age range.

[-KOKid-]

Those weight may be signifigantly less than were accustomed to seeing today, but they were in alot better shape.

Take a look at todays top 10 (The Ring). John Ruiz, Lamon Brewster and Samuel Peter are all heavy set. David Tua and James Toney are plain fat.
Never have so many top heavies been so chubby and overweight as they are today. We're talking 50% of the top 10 here!

Ali, Foreman, Louis, Norton, Holyfield, etc. - they were all in super shape with a lot less body fat than the ones we see today. Being overeight or fat does not make you a better fighter, only slower and easier to hit.
If those heabvies mentioned here came down to their natural weight, they would have been little different than the ones of 30-40 years ago.
In fact, Wladimir Klitchko is the only one that probably has his weight just right.

-KOKid-

[silkov]

I think todays fighters are far too muscle bound and concentrate too much on these suppliments and sometimes certain other substances which while it gives them a powerful physique does nothing but hinder stamina etc. I think the best weight for a heavy is about 210 to 220 pounds... any bigger than that and the size becomes a handicap... as we can see today all too well with most of our now 250+ heavies being knackered after 3 or 4 rounds of even light fighting.

[silkov]

I think if Marciano fought Joe Frazier Fraziers extra weight (he was about 205 at his peak) would be an advantage.... he was that much stronger I think but still had the speed, ...in fact was probably faster than Marciano.

[The Great John L]

I think if Marciano fought Joe Frazier Fraziers extra weight (he was about 205 at his peak) would be an advantage.... he was that much stronger I think but still had the speed, ...in fact was probably faster than Marciano.

Huh???

Oh, I see. You're baiting BB again. Is it possible to have one thread on this forum not turn into a Marciano debate?

[silkov]

I think if Marciano fought Joe Frazier Fraziers extra weight (he was about 205 at his peak) would be an advantage.... he was that much stronger I think but still had the speed, ...in fact was probably faster than Marciano.

Huh???

Oh, I see. You're baiting BB again. Is it possible to have one thread on this forum not turn into a Marciano debate?

Not at all baiting, I just think its a interesting question?.. . is Fraziers bigger frame an advantage over Marciano?.. . sorry if it offends you!... :x

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

he was that much stronger

frazier was faster than marciano, but he wasnt stronger. Marciano was incredbibly strong for a man his size, and with his thick body, mini telephone poll like arms, and huge tree trunk legs, he was quite strong.


frazier actually wasnt too strong, there was a strength even he did and i i guess he embarrased himself(though weightliftint strength is different from ring strength).


but guys like charles and moore who fought big strong top heavy contenders said rocky was far and away the strongest fighter they faced. imagine that a 185lb man the strongest they faced.




i give the speed edge to frazier, but strength to rocky.




185lb compared to 205lb? thats nothing. nothing big at all for the heavyweight division.


barry said it best

" Most all of the earlier fighters always trimmed down from over 200 pounds, which in my opinion gave them the added speed that the lumbering, overweight heavyweights of today do not possess, yet they still had the 200+ pound power and strength, their bodies were just tweaked a little better for 15, or 20 rounds... "

rocky still retained the same strength and power he had as his natural weight of over 200lb, he just simply had more speed and stamina.


extra weigh only slows u down, it doesnt give u more power. real one punch power, is god gifted.








if rocky fought today, his handlers would take advantage of modern technology and put him on the right program and due to his big boned structutre he could handle more, but because of his height he probably would be no more than 205lb if he fought today.