Sam Peter vs. Rocky Marciano.

[Tomasino]

Can't believe old Jeremy Williams got a mention.

[Ambling Alp II]

The problem is...where are these 200 pound HWs who are cutting through the division?

If size is a disadvantage why doesn't every fighter in the Cruiserweight division simply move up to Heavy and make double or triple the money?

When Ali first came on the scene he was a relative giant compared to vast majority of top HWs that had come before him.

Bowe and Lewis... When imagining them up against the greatest of the division...their best feature is their size.

Being big doesn't mean you're better. But it's a real advantage in 95% of cases.

Where are the 200 pound heavyweights? Maybe a better question is, where are the good cruiserweights? My theory is that several fighters (depending on their height and natural build) should be fighting in the 200-220 range, but instead fight at over 230.

What happened the last time that a fighter moved up and got a title shot while not weighing over 200? He won. The time before that, he won. The time before that, he won.

Ali was not a relative giant at all. Willard and Carnera were a lot bigger. Baer and Jeffries outweighed him and were almost as tall. Joe Louis was close to his size. Liston outweighed him and had a longer reach.

We can use theories all day. Thread like Peter vs Marciano and Walcott vs Klitschko pit a great smaller fighter up against a not so great bigger fighter. How about we look at what has actually happened in those cases?

What has happened when a great heavyweight fought a heavyweight weighing over 240 pounds? Lets look through history (not including situations where one of the fighters was clearly not near his prime.)
Who has won?
I would like to see some examples of the bigger guy winning against a great heavyweight. There should be a ton right? Anyone, give examples of this happening.

[Controversial]

Size can play a bit part but just being big for the sake of it doesn't guarantee success. Foreman, Frazier, Ali, Tyson, Liston and Holyfield as examples were all 220lbs and under. Lewis for a long time was around 230lb and bulked up as he got older. As someone else said many HWs could lose 20-30lbs if they trained hard enough as they often aren't rock solid at these huge weights. Marciano walked around at a big weight and trained down to 185lb where as some HWs are doing the opposite and bulking up.

[keithmoonhangover]

do you only drool over American fighters from the past?

Only if they are standing beside me when I have excess flem in my mouth.

How about when you have phlegm in your mouth?

Nothing worse when trying to be a smart arse, than making yourself look a dick because your spelling is crap.

My spelling is awful, always has been, always will be and I don't care if makes me look a dick. My spelling is on par with your boxing knowledge.

[cfang]

Calling a decent and honourable fighter like don cockell a 'pathetic dog' is a disgrace. He had glandular problems which meant he couldn't stop putting on weight hence his move to heavy and he was most likely drained against Turpin (who was off a tremendous boxer). Cockell managed to beat Lloyd marshall twice, harry matthews and roland lastarza. He was a dam fine heavy who fought at a very high level and showed considerable bravery in the marciano fight.

Who would win?

I think the bigger, stronger Peter stops Marciano.

I Agree... It's the WRONG matchup for Marciano.. LIke matching little teeny Joe Frazier with the big 6'3" X 217 George Foreman, who was a big underdog.. You see, the Marciano who took 9 rounds to dispose of Don Cockell -- a pathetic dog who was previously knocked out many times, including by Middleweight Randy Turpin no less -- would go down versus the hammering fists of Sam Peter.. At his best---in the Waldimir fight---Peter could absorb an unbelievable punch---that was before Vitali got hold of Peter and wrecked his chin.. Peter could absorb a dynamite punch and could also hit hard.. Sam Peter smashed several big swingers like Jeremy Williams out very quickly like they were nothing at all.

Come to think of it... I think the big swinging Jeremy Williams would be a perfect match-up for Rocky... Williams was as easy to hit as Don Cockell.. Rocky could probably get him out in the late rounds.. It sure wouldn't be easy because Rocky weighed 184 at his best, while Jeremy Williams ran about 225 and was very strong.. I wouldn't bet on such a fight because of the huge size disparity.. But If the quick fisted Peter could smack Williams out so quickly, I think Lil Rocky might get to him eventually.

[HyacinthusTurnipseed]

I would like to see some examples of the bigger guy winning against a great heavyweight. There should be a ton right? Anyone, give examples of this happening.

Lets start with George Foreman annihilating Joe Frazier. Then we can jump to Buster Douglas beating Tyson.

Both were considered as nothing more than " challengers " to the " great " Heavyweights of the time.

If necessary I will name more later.

Those are irrelevant examples. George was a fellow ATG with all of a 3.5lb weight advantage over Frazier. Douglas had 11lbs on Tyson (not insignificant but nothing unusual among heavyweight fights) and was naturally talented as anyone just couldn't put it all together most nights.

We aren't talking about some hypothetical big man who might also be very good on a given night. We are talking about frickin' Sam Peter, a mediocre caretaker champion heavyweight not even 1% of Foreman at his hungry, angry prime.

He has nothing to help him deal with Marciano at all.

[crusader]

Rocky could probably make LHW with today's cutting practices, and maybe even SMW, where hed still be short and have a tiny reach. People talk about him beating top fighters, but many of those guys would be similarly undersized by contemporary standards; failure to recognize this is often problem when people try to dismiss size disparties by pointing to the quality of opponent the smaller fighter beat.

With his face first style I think Rocky would lose to many larger fighters who aren't held in such high regard, though Im not sure if Peter (quite limited, although actually a pro unlike our 7 foot friend) would be one of them.

I agree with Ezzard that mentioning size gets a lot of people worked up.

[Kalan]

Size can play a bit part but just being big for the sake of it doesn't guarantee success. Foreman, Frazier, Ali, Tyson, Liston and Holyfield as examples were all 220lbs and under. Lewis for a long time was around 230lb and bulked up as he got older. As someone else said many HWs could lose 20-30lbs if they trained hard enough as they often aren't rock solid at these huge weights. Marciano walked around at a big weight and trained down to 185lb where as some HWs are doing the opposite and bulking up.

What you're forgetting is that Marciano wasn't just a very little guy in weight... Rocky was very little in size and bone structure... Frazier weighted 214 for Foreman, but that was totally BS weight that wasn't real.. Frazier was actually 195 pounds if he trained down as rock hard as he could.. But Joe never did he was always a bit flabby -- but Frazier smashed out 188-pound Bob Foster like he was a Lightweight.. And Bob Foster smashed out Dick Tiger like he was a Featherweight.. And Foreman battered the 3 pounds lighter Frazier like he was a Cruiserweight.. Size matters.. In truth, Frazier was nothing more than a blown up Cruiserweight although I'm sure he would have run over Marciano like he wasn't even there.. Joe had size and strength on Rocky for sure.. Can you imagine Archie Moore going 9 rounds with Joe Frazier??? He wouldn't have lasted 3 rounds and I don't think Archie would have decked Frazier like he did Rocky.

Let's stop talking about Willard, Carnera, David Price, Julius Long, Dimitrenko, Solis and 1000 other 250-300 pound pieces of crap as if they were athletes with any ability or any athleticism whatsoever. It's an insult. Remember, Sam Peter fought the 7-foot tall X 260-pound, gangly shanked Julius Long, and knocked Long out in the 1st round as easy as eating pie.. I'm not sure Marciano could have done the job as quickly as that -- having watched Rocky's slogging affair with the chinless punching bag, Don Cockell for 9 rounds, but maybe Rocky could have done him in eventually because Long had 2 left feet and nobody ever missed him with a punch yet.

[Kalan]

Sam Peter splats ANYONE Mariano EVER fought, especially at the times Marciano fought them. Hell I don't rate Roy Jones Jr at all, but the version that beat Ruiz would make Marciano look a kunt for 6 rounds, get bored and KHTFO in the 7th.

And I'm pretty much in agreement with this comment.

[HyacinthusTurnipseed]

Now you are simply LYING.

Foreman was NOT considered an ATG when he was the UNDER DOG going into the Frazier fight, and neither was Douglas.

If you have got NOTHING more than bullshite to bring into the equation don't waste my ferking time.

Sam Peter splats ANYONE Mariano EVER fought, especially at the times Marciano fought them. Hell I don't rate Roy Jones Jr at all, but the version that beat Ruiz would make Marciano look a kunt for 6 rounds, get bored and KHTFO in the 7th.

Obviously they weren't. But what they were considered at the time doesn't really matter - Peter isn't going into this hypothetical fight as a mystery man, but as a demonstrably limited, much lower quality fighter than what we now know Foreman is.

So what Foreman as an unknown can do and what Sam Peter can do aren't the same thing, which is why it is an irrelevant example. What you have to find is a case where a prime, super-tenacious, skilled and aggressive fighter lost to a much, much less skilled, much, much less tenacious man who beat him because he was a bit taller and a lot fatter.

Or maybe we are just working with vastly different opinions about how good Sam Peter is. I wouldn't confidently back him to beat Charles or JJ Walcott personally.

[Ambling Alp II]

I would like to see some examples of the bigger guy winning against a great heavyweight. There should be a ton right? Anyone, give examples of this happening.

Lets start with George Foreman annihilating Joe Frazier. Then we can jump to Buster Douglas beating Tyson.

Both were considered as nothing more than " challengers " to the " great " Heavyweights of the time.

If necessary I will name more later.

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

[Kalan]

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds. Douglas only weighed 231. So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

First of all...why wouldn't Buster Douglas count as a big guy??? He was 9 pounds from 240 and much bigger than little Mike Tyson... It was only 13 pounds in weight, but don't let anybody fool you, 13 pounds can be huge in the Boxing game... Douglas was not only heavier than Tyson, but he was 5 inches taller... His arms were much longer.. His legs were much longer giving him tremendous leverage on Tyson.. We're talking about a mediocre big man destroying a great little man with superior height, size, and reach.

And Frazier wasn't 3 pounds lighter than Foreman in anything close to ripped, rock-solid weight was he??? ... Watch that fight again---and just look at their arms... look at their shoulders... Foreman's arms were not only much longer than Frazier's, but twice as big around as Frazier's -- and his shoulders were twice as big... Foreman was rock-solid ripped. In career condition. When Foreman weighed 263 for Adilson Rodrigues he was about as fat as Frazier was for their 2nd fight at 224.. When Foreman weighted 235 for Dwight Muhammad Qawi, he was probably in better shape than Frazier was for their 1st fight at 214.. I couldn't believe Foreman's conditioning for the Qawi fight.. Why do you ramp it up for a little Heavyweight like Qawi??? He was no problem at all as it turned out.. Qawi had a really good jab as a Light Heavyweight and Young and Ali jabbed the crap out of George.. Maybe George was concerned about his jab and laid off the Fatburgers for 1 fight.

And Wladimir Klitschko meets your 240 plus weight requirement.. He easily dominated 2-Division World Champion David Haye.. At 40 years old and well over 24... And Vitali Klitschko easily out-boxed the 216-pound 2-Division World Champion Thomas Adamek in another one that meets your criteria.. Also, Lennox Lewis added about 30 pounds of powerhouse muscle over the years.. He was 250 when he dominated little Mike Tyson.. He meets your size demand... There haven't been that many top-notch Heavyweight Champions in Fistic History who scaled over 240 yet.. There soon will be.. Usually guys that size are not exceptionally fast and athletic are they??? ... But see how much bigger and faster Basketball players are getting, so Boxing will follow.. Although many very small Heavyweights like Marciano were also very far from being super fast or athletic.. Marciano certainly looked crude, slow, plodding, wide open, and not particularly skilled or slick and clever.. Peter actually looked better and faster at his best.. He was even favored to beat Wladimir when he was undefeated.

[Ezzard]

I would like to see some examples of the bigger guy winning against a great heavyweight. There should be a ton right? Anyone, give examples of this happening.

Lets start with George Foreman annihilating Joe Frazier. Then we can jump to Buster Douglas beating Tyson.

Both were considered as nothing more than " challengers " to the " great " Heavyweights of the time.

If necessary I will name more later.

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

But Alp, Foreman and Douglas were considered big guys by everyone that went before them. Willard was an anomaly.

This exact debate was going on in the 1980s when people were arguing that the 220 pound giants would be too much for Jim Corbett and Gene Tunney.

I prefer watching Joe Louis and Ezzard Charles. They move better. Have a greater skillset. More output. But the paradigm of HW boxing has changed significantly. They might not be as easy on the eye but they are effective at what they do.

They can still be beaten. But the advantages should not be so quickly dismissed.

[Controversial]

Lets start with George Foreman annihilating Joe Frazier. Then we can jump to Buster Douglas beating Tyson.

Both were considered as nothing more than " challengers " to the " great " Heavyweights of the time.

If necessary I will name more later.

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

In fairness I don't think there is much to add to Kalan's reply to your post. He has just about nailed it.

Yet a 235lb Foreman, rated by many as the hardest punching HW in history, struggled to beat the former LHW and cruiserweight Qawi. Qawi was 5'7" so shorter than Marciano and Frazier and fought under 200lb for all but one bout prior to fighting Foreman. He also took the fight at very short notice coming in 30lb heavier than he was against Holyfield in his previous fight. He was out of shape. Adding 30lb of blubber wouldn't make Qawi any fitter, faster or able to take a punch better, if anything he would've probably fought a better fight if he still weighed 190lb.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

After much deliberation, I'm going to have to take marciano. Lol at how many fat slobs are "too big" for sculpted fighters that threw 4 times the volume.

[Controversial]

In fairness I don't think there is much to add to Kalan's reply to your post. He has just about nailed it.

Yet a 235lb Foreman, rated by many as the hardest punching HW in history, struggled to beat the former LHW and cruiserweight Qawi. Qawi was 5'7" so shorter than Marciano and Frazier and fought under 200lb for all but one bout prior to fighting Foreman. He also took the fight at very short notice coming in 30lb heavier than he was against Holyfield in his previous fight. He was out of shape. Adding 30lb of blubber wouldn't make Qawi any fitter, faster or able to take a punch better, if anything he would've probably fought a better fight if he still weighed 190lb.

So how does 39 year old George Foreman STOPPING a guy in 7 rounds equate to a 29 year old Marciano winning his title then retiring at 32, or a 28 year old Peter winning his title? I am saying the version that beat Toney, and Maskaev splatters Marciano.

I was making reference to a big punching HW fighting someone of similar size (actually shorter) to Marciano and not blasting them out. Don't you think Qawi would've put up a better fight if he was at his best fighting weight, i.e under 200lb?

[Tomasino]

Marciano fought and beat the best black fighters of his day. He wasn't beaten by anyone. That's why he's an icon and an ATG. Not because he was white. What an absolute dick this guy Oldie is.

[Kalan]

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

In fairness I don't think there is much to add to Kalan's reply to your post. He has just about nailed it.

Yet a 235lb Foreman, rated by many as the hardest punching HW in history, struggled to beat the former LHW and cruiserweight Qawi. Qawi was 5'7" so shorter than Marciano and Frazier and fought under 200lb for all but one bout prior to fighting Foreman. He also took the fight at very short notice coming in 30lb heavier than he was against Holyfield in his previous fight. He was out of shape. Adding 30lb of blubber wouldn't make Qawi any fitter, faster or able to take a punch better, if anything he would've probably fought a better fight if he still weighed 190lb.

Let's be clear. An old Foreman pummeled Qawi for 7 rounds and made him quit. Qawi was down a couple times and wasn't in the fight a lot that I could see. Those buzzsaw combos didn't do anything to George. It was similar to Marciano pounding fat Light Heavyweights Moore and Cockell for 9 rounds each, but they didn't have the hand speed, head movement, and slipperiness of the Camden Buzzsaw.

I thought it was similar to the Frazier fight in a way, but Foreman lacked the youth, strength, conditioning, energy, and firepower of the Frazier effort, which was his best fight that he ever fought.. You're talking about the hardest puncher ever??? Certainly not the 235 pound version who fought Qawi.. There was some power there but not the guy who ripped Frazier.. However, as an older version George was mean and serious. He hurt the Hell out of Qawi.. I expected Qawi to quit any time, because he was getting beat to death with glancing blows.. But part of power is having the conditioning, reflexes, and reactions to nail a guy clean and get him out ... and he was knocking Frazier into the ring lights.

[Dixonian]

Calling a decent and honourable fighter like don cockell a 'pathetic dog' is a disgrace. He had glandular problems which meant he couldn't stop putting on weight hence his move to heavy and he was most likely drained against Turpin (who was off a tremendous boxer). Cockell managed to beat Lloyd marshall twice, harry matthews and roland lastarza. He was a dam fine heavy who fought at a very high level and showed considerable bravery in the marciano fight.

Well said. He was head-butted, hit low, forearm smashed in that fight. He even threw up between rounds but never quit. A true gladiator who has the respect of any right-minded person who knows anything about boxing.

[keithmoonhangover]

Marciano fought and beat the best black fighters of his day. He wasn't beaten by anyone. That's why he's an icon and an ATG. Not because he was white. What an absolute dick this guy Oldie is.

[Ambling Alp II]

Lets start with George Foreman annihilating Joe Frazier. Then we can jump to Buster Douglas beating Tyson.

Both were considered as nothing more than " challengers " to the " great " Heavyweights of the time.

If necessary I will name more later.

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

But Alp, Foreman and Douglas were considered big guys by everyone that went before them. Willard was an anomaly.

This exact debate was going on in the 1980s when people were arguing that the 220 pound giants would be too much for Jim Corbett and Gene Tunney.

I prefer watching Joe Louis and Ezzard Charles. They move better. Have a greater skillset. More output. But the paradigm of HW boxing has changed significantly. They might not be as easy on the eye but they are effective at what they do.

They can still be beaten. But the advantages should not be so quickly dismissed.

And you should not quickly so quickly assume that it's actually an advantage.

Big heavyweights didn't just start recently. There were many fighters much bigger than Foreman or Douglas 70, 80 years ago. They just weren't good enough to be very successful against top smaller heavweights.

You don't even have to that far back. An ancient Holyfield should have got the decision against Valuev, who outweighed him by a ton. (Not to mention wins over Douglas, Bowe etc.) Chris Byrd was nothing special, didn't start out as a heavyweight and did well. Roy Jones moved up and won the title. An out of shape James Toney did pretty well against heavyweights.

[keithmoonhangover]

How about when you have phlegm in your mouth?

Nothing worse when trying to be a smart arse, than making yourself look a dick because your spelling is crap.

My spelling is awful, always has been, always will be and I don't care if makes me look a dick. My spelling is on par with your boxing knowledge.

You have no knowledge, hence your inability to spell.

Don't you think that mocking my spelling is a little bit childish?

[Controversial]

In fairness I don't think there is much to add to Kalan's reply to your post. He has just about nailed it.

Yet a 235lb Foreman, rated by many as the hardest punching HW in history, struggled to beat the former LHW and cruiserweight Qawi. Qawi was 5'7" so shorter than Marciano and Frazier and fought under 200lb for all but one bout prior to fighting Foreman. He also took the fight at very short notice coming in 30lb heavier than he was against Holyfield in his previous fight. He was out of shape. Adding 30lb of blubber wouldn't make Qawi any fitter, faster or able to take a punch better, if anything he would've probably fought a better fight if he still weighed 190lb.

Let's be clear. An old Foreman pummeled Qawi for 7 rounds and made him quit. Qawi was down a couple times and wasn't in the fight a lot that I could see. Those buzzsaw combos didn't do anything to George. It was similar to Marciano pounding fat Light Heavyweights Moore and Cockell for 9 rounds each, but they didn't have the hand speed, head movement, and slipperiness of the Camden Buzzsaw.

I thought it was similar to the Frazier fight in a way, but Foreman lacked the youth, strength, conditioning, energy, and firepower of the Frazier effort, which was his best fight that he ever fought.. You're talking about the hardest puncher ever??? Certainly not the 235 pound version who fought Qawi.. There was some power there but not the guy who ripped Frazier.. However, as an older version George was mean and serious. He hurt the Hell out of Qawi.. I expected Qawi to quit any time, because he was getting beat to death with glancing blows.. But part of power is having the conditioning, reflexes, and reactions to nail a guy clean and get him out ... and he was knocking Frazier into the ring lights.

I was more pointing out that a small out of shape guy took huge punches from Foreman for several rounds and the weight Qawi was carrying was more of a hindrance than beneficial. Qawi was very overweight, he hardly trained and took the fight at 2-3 weeks notice. Qawi was a LHW and CW and had never fought a HW before, the heaviest guy he fought before Foreman weighed 197lb. Its was a closer fight than people think, the scorecards were close and I seem to recall the commentator thought Qawi was ahead. Neither knockdown was counted as one was a punch to the back of the head and the other a push. Some posters in another post were backing Foreman to beat Tyson even at that stage of his career because Tyson was 'too small' !!!

[Controversial]

So how does 39 year old George Foreman STOPPING a guy in 7 rounds equate to a 29 year old Marciano winning his title then retiring at 32, or a 28 year old Peter winning his title? I am saying the version that beat Toney, and Maskaev splatters Marciano.

I was making reference to a big punching HW fighting someone of similar size (actually shorter) to Marciano and not blasting them out. Don't you think Qawi would've put up a better fight if he was at his best fighting weight, i.e under 200lb?

Not particularly no. He might have been more evasive, but he certainly wouldn't have made a dent in Foreman, as he didn't at 220. Get things in perspective. Foreman had his 8th comeback fight against Quawi after a 10 year lay off. The previous 7 had lasted a total 26 rounds between them. Quawi was a step up in class to the others, even though he had only been fighting at Cruiser for the previous 3 years.

So Qawi being 30lb overweight was beneficial do you think?

[Tomasino]

Way to quote part of what I said. Neither weighed 240 or more. Which is what I asked for in my post. Foreman only weighed 217 in the first Frazier fight; only outweighing Frazier by three pounds.
Douglas only weighed 231.
So neither count.

Come on this should be easy. If it's such a huge advantage for a heavyweight to be big, you (or anyone for that matter) should be able to come up with examples of a fighter 240 or above beating a great fighter that is smaller than that. Come on. Lets see them.

But Alp, Foreman and Douglas were considered big guys by everyone that went before them. Willard was an anomaly.

This exact debate was going on in the 1980s when people were arguing that the 220 pound giants would be too much for Jim Corbett and Gene Tunney.

I prefer watching Joe Louis and Ezzard Charles. They move better. Have a greater skillset. More output. But the paradigm of HW boxing has changed significantly. They might not be as easy on the eye but they are effective at what they do.

They can still be beaten. But the advantages should not be so quickly dismissed.

And you should not quickly so quickly assume that it's actually an advantage.

Big heavyweights didn't just start recently. There were many fighters much bigger than Foreman or Douglas 70, 80 years ago. They just weren't good enough to be very successful against top smaller heavweights.

You don't even have to that far back. An ancient Holyfield should have got the decision against Valuev, who outweighed him by a ton. (Not to mention wins over Douglas, Bowe etc.) Chris Byrd was nothing special, didn't start out as a heavyweight and did well. Roy Jones moved up and won the title. An out of shape James Toney did pretty well against heavyweights.

Didn't Toney do so well because he was fat? That seems to be a prevailing argument among the forum trolls