Dividing lines re: the HW division

[BoxBuzz]

I'm really not attempting to create chaos or unrest, but there is one area of discussion that I think is ripe for analytics.

Although it may never change. anything

The point regarding the HW division about big vs small.

Why would at some random weight, would weight no longer be an issue?

I've been so jaded about a champion with a perfect record that I have often disrespected Marciano....being small and perfect just bugged me. lol. And for my opinion....I just thought he was lucky.....did he marry an Irish woman? Not sure....anyway these days the bigger guys do seem to be in charge.......does anyone think Rocky cleans up on these behemoths?

I can't buy it. And it makes sense once the level of skill becomes evened out that bigger is often going to be better.


Now Kalan......this does not mean that an auto mechanic the size of let's say Wilt could be the champion.....Because skill counts for a lot. And no one is going to gain that much in 6 months. But overall.....I'm not sure that we should be dismissing the idea to easily.

Just my two cents.

And what is the practical outcome of this? Do we make subdivision for every 25 pounds over 200? Or just let the 200 pound champion go the way of the Dodo?

[sweetviolenturge]

I believe that the modern day mix of great size & athleticism is key. It's a mix that we haven't previously had.
Whereas in the past heavies of great size such as Primo Carnera, Buddy Bear, Abe Simon & the like existed, but they were lumbering giants. And, that remained the case right on through to the more modern era of the '80s with such fighters as James J. Beatie & Mike "The Giant" White. With Gerry Cooney breaking the mold a wee bit, but not entirely.
It wasn't until the era of Lennox Lewis & the Klitschko bros. that we began to see the true modern heavyweight. Fighters whose athletic prowess & skillsets matched their size.

[HomicideHenry]

Jack Dempsey weighed only 187 pounds when he fought 6'6" 245 pound Jess Willard, and it was no contest. Dempsey was quite the acid test for alot of large men: Carl Morris, Luis Firpo, Fred Fulton, Arthur Pelkey, etc and they were easily eradicated.

Later on Joe Louis would demonstrate, also, this same capability destroying men like Primo Carnera, Max Baer, Buddy Baer, etc. but it can be said that all of these men were not equal in skills in relation to their size.

"The good big man will lose to a great little man", is an addage that was most definitely true for over 120 years in the sport. Unfortunately, athleticism has caught up with the big men, and it's difficult to imagine a highly talented small/average sized man belting out the 6'6, 6'7, 6'8, 6'9, behemoths today who have agility and nimbleness unlike their predecessors.

That being said, I would have loved to have seen Dempsey against Luther McCarty who was 6'4" and 230 pounds and had excellent ring generalship for the time. I would have loved to have seen Tunney up against someone like George Godfrey, a truly enormous and talented man for the era.

Had they been successful against men like that, maybe my opinion would be different than it is. It's hard for me to imagine even Muhammad Ali (6'3" 215) even at his fastest being able to embarrass the Klitschko brothers, let alone Lennox Lewis because Ali never quite fought a man who was the combination of size, power, speed, skills, conditioning, etc that they had.

[BoxBuzz]

We once had a thread here devoted to the hypothetical between Ken Norton and Ezzard Charles.......it was about 10 years ago.....I asked the question in earnest, and was almost bludgeoned by the crowd that pretty much said Ezz would be too much for Kenny....just too much talent.

I might be wrong, but the new opinion would be far more on Kenny's side, over the course of this decade the "general opinion" has changed, seemingly quite a bit.

How much is about sentiment, and how much is a true objective analysis on our part? It's been quite a ride regarding how the opinions change over the course of these roughly twenty years that this forum has been operating.

[HomicideHenry]

We once had a thread here devoted to the hypothetical between Ken Norton and Ezzard Charles.......it was about 10 years ago.....I asked the question in earnest, and was almost bludgeoned by the crowd that pretty much said Ezz would be too much for Kenny....just too much talent.

I might be wrong, but the new opinion would be far more on Kenny's side, over the course of this decade the "general opinion" has changed, seemingly quite a bit.

How much is about sentiment, and how much is a true objective analysis on our part? It's been quite a ride regarding how the opinions change over the course of these roughly twenty years that this forum has been operating.

I remember that Buzz. It seems every three or five years, people do 180's on everything. Wasn't too long ago Marciano used to be respected. Now he's dog food. Goes in cycles.

[BoxBuzz]

Oh yeah, about 9 years ago we had MarcianoMania in full bloom. Someone was postulating a 51st fight as I recall, May have even been his moniker? Like Marciano 51 or some such. Every 3rd thread was another salute of respect to the fella. I think he really believed there was a "lost fight". It went on for months.

[Ambling Alp II]

We once had a thread here devoted to the hypothetical between Ken Norton and Ezzard Charles.......it was about 10 years ago.....I asked the question in earnest, and was almost bludgeoned by the crowd that pretty much said Ezz would be too much for Kenny....just too much talent.

I might be wrong, but the new opinion would be far more on Kenny's side, over the course of this decade the "general opinion" has changed, seemingly quite a bit.

How much is about sentiment, and how much is a true objective analysis on our part? It's been quite a ride regarding how the opinions change over the course of these roughly twenty years that this forum has been operating.

Lately people seem to think all you have to do is look at the scale to predict the winner. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, some people think that weight is this huge advantage that can't be overcome.

I also think that to some extent it depends on how long you have been a fan. Many people tend to have little respect for fighters before there time. Size seems to be an easy way to write off the fighters from years ago. (Of course they ignore that there were big fighters way back or claim those big guys weren't as good as the big guys now.)
So naturally, people that have not been a fan for as long and/or don't appreciate the history of the sport are going to be all gaga about the weight "advantage".

People that have been fans for a long time and/or do appreciate the history of the sport, generally aren't all that impressed by weight. They know that at a certain point weight really doesn't do any more for you. They know that the smaller guy had won too many times for a weight "advantage" to mean much.

[jamamb]

how good were the old heavys who would still be considered shws today?

would willard and carnera beat the current likes of joshua?

[BitPlayer]

It's because after a point there's too few people big enough that are also any good they get put together.

[littlepug]

how good were the old heavys who would still be considered shws today?

would willard and carnera beat the current likes of joshua?

Cant compare because of social, ecenomic, medical, financial, scientific and evolutionary differences between those eras, how do you match them ? Send Josh back to that time ? Bring those boys into our time ? Have them meet as they are ? Its a fruitless task.

[Controversial]

Its a never ending debate. Wilder is quite light considering his height, only 214lbs in his last fight, but I think he punches harder than AJ who is almost 3 stone heavier. I think over 15 stone makes a HW dangerous at a world level these days, assuming they are in good shape and have boxing ability. At some point size and weight makes a difference all other things being equal. There are always going to be exceptions of course.

[Tony1244]

We don't need more divisions.

We'd end up with a super HW "champion" like Valuev who can't fight a lick.

Perhaps in the future, raise the Cruiserweight limit, but 200 is fine for that limit right now.

[Ambling Alp II]

Its a never ending debate. Wilder is quite light considering his height, only 214lbs in his last fight, but I think he punches harder than AJ who is almost 3 stone heavier. I think over 15 stone makes a HW dangerous at a world level these days, assuming they are in good shape and have boxing ability. At some point size and weight makes a difference all other things being equal. There are always going to be exceptions of course.

Wilder alone should be the answer to the debate.
It never used to be a debate. We would just look at how good someone was. Fans seemed to know that at a certain point it was not an advantage to be big.
The problem is that all things aren't equal. On average a bigger man would be a harder puncher and be able to take more punishment. On average a bigger man is slower and has worse stamina.

At a certain point a human being reaches the optimal size. It's not like 220 is better than 210, 230 is better than 220 , 240 is better than 230 and 300 is better than 290 and so on.

215 is a 35 pound weight advantage over 180. But 250 is not a weight advantage over 215. That is what many people don't seem to get.
When we actually look at what has happened (real life, not fantasy fights) when these fights take place, we see this.

[Tony1244]

Its a never ending debate. Wilder is quite light considering his height, only 214lbs in his last fight, but I think he punches harder than AJ who is almost 3 stone heavier. I think over 15 stone makes a HW dangerous at a world level these days, assuming they are in good shape and have boxing ability. At some point size and weight makes a difference all other things being equal. There are always going to be exceptions of course.

Wilder alone should be the answer to the debate.
It never used to be a debate. We would just look at how good someone was. Fans seemed to know that at a certain point it was not an advantage to be big.
The problem is that all things aren't equal. On average a bigger man would be a harder puncher and be able to take more punishment. On average a bigger man is slower and has worse stamina.

At a certain point a human being reaches the optimal size. It's not like 220 is better than 210, 230 is better than 220 , 240 is better than 230 and 300 is better than 290 and so on.

215 is a 35 pound weight advantage over 180. But 250 is not a weight advantage over 215. That is what many people don't seem to get.
When we actually look at what has happened (real life, not fantasy fights) when these fights take place, we see this.

Exactly. Mike Tyson, Holyfield, Haye, and Wilder have had a lot of success.

A juggernaut division would have some piece of garbage like Butterbean as the super HW "champion" while the real HW champion could beat the crap out of him. The alphabets already take advantage of the unknowledgeable fans enough as it is.

[DrDuke]

Size is not everything, size is a one of the factors to gain success. The thing is, skills are becoming more advanced with time and the usage of size is also a skill. In Luis era the skillset was on the lower level and Carnera, for example, didn't use his size in a proper way. Tyson case is another example, Mike was knocking out every bigger journeyman, as he was far more skilled, but he had tougher fights against such guys, like Tucker and Smith, as the gap in skillset was less there. Lewis and Wlad have been dominating everyone, they both had been extremely skillful, including the ability to use size. However, everything has its limits, too big isn't good, Valeuv was correctly mentioned here. So I also tend to agree with the comment of Ambling Alp II, that points out: 215 is a 35 pound weight advantage over 180. But 250 is not a weight advantage over 215. That is what many people don't seem to get. We need no new divisions, we need more good fighters.

[HomicideHenry]

Oh yeah, about 9 years ago we had MarcianoMania in full bloom. Someone was postulating a 51st fight as I recall, May have even been his moniker? Like Marciano 51 or some such. Every 3rd thread was another salute of respect to the fella. I think he really believed there was a "lost fight". It went on for months.

His hypothesis was that Marciano on his tour of South America had a lost fight down there, and allegedly he was going there to find the proof because he was writing a book on Rocky.

[Cojimar 1946]

One thing that's easily observable is that bigger heavyweights are vastly more successful in recent years than in prior eras. This is fairly compelling evidence they have improved relative to their smaller counterparts.

[Cojimar 1946]

Bringing up Mike Tyson as an example is not compelling, the top heavyweights are considerably bigger than they were back in Tyson's day. There are many guys at 240+ now whereas Tyson rarely faced guys over 6'4 or 230. David Haye came up short against the best big man he faced.

[The Great John L]

We don't need more divisions.

We'd end up with a super HW "champion" like Valuev who can't fight a lick.

Perhaps in the future, raise the Cruiserweight limit, but 200 is fine for that limit right now.

Agreed. MMA, where weight advantages are much more important, has 205 and then 205 - 265. It's quite common for the best 205 pound MMA'ers to step up and beat top 240 and larger opponents. It's the thin talent of the current boxing scene that makes it harder to imagine a guy like Louis beating Joshua, but if you watch his films it seems like a pretty reasonable result.

And as someone noted, Wilder fights between 215-225, quite thin and doesn't seem to have many problems beating 240+ contenders. He's essentially a modern day Jeff Merritt, who was very fast and "athletic" whatever that means. He just got hit on the chin a few times and then faded away.

[oogiebe]

The HW division has always been the question. All Lightweights in history fought at the LW weight....and so on. But, as we all know, the HW division, with no limit, doesn't take into account the natural evolution of the bigger, faster, stronger, more agile big man. If a lightweight moves up to welterweight, (forget the "tweener" division for this example), he weighs 135 in his class and fights a guy 147 (or whatever it is), the weight differential as expressed as a % is 8.88%. For that same ratio to pertain to a 225 lb man fighting a man of 237 is only 5.33%, and so on. So I'm wondering if that would be more proper to examine. It doesn't sound too bad for a 225 lb guy fighting someone 8.88% larger or 245. Thoughts? (other than I'm whacked out!)

[Controversial]

Its a never ending debate. Wilder is quite light considering his height, only 214lbs in his last fight, but I think he punches harder than AJ who is almost 3 stone heavier. I think over 15 stone makes a HW dangerous at a world level these days, assuming they are in good shape and have boxing ability. At some point size and weight makes a difference all other things being equal. There are always going to be exceptions of course.

Wilder alone should be the answer to the debate.
It never used to be a debate. We would just look at how good someone was. Fans seemed to know that at a certain point it was not an advantage to be big.
The problem is that all things aren't equal. On average a bigger man would be a harder puncher and be able to take more punishment. On average a bigger man is slower and has worse stamina.

At a certain point a human being reaches the optimal size. It's not like 220 is better than 210, 230 is better than 220 , 240 is better than 230 and 300 is better than 290 and so on.

215 is a 35 pound weight advantage over 180. But 250 is not a weight advantage over 215. That is what many people don't seem to get.
When we actually look at what has happened (real life, not fantasy fights) when these fights take place, we see this.

It can depend. Do you think Wilder would come in at 214lbs versus AJ? On the flip side I doubt Haye will be so heavy next time against Bellew. Then you have Bellew who was 214lbs openly say he wouldn’t touch Wilder and AJ as they are too big but he fancies his chance against he even bigger Fury as he doesn’t punch too hard. So many variables involved including styles.

[jamamb]

how good were the old heavys who would still be considered shws today?

would willard and carnera beat the current likes of joshua?

Cant compare because of social, ecenomic, medical, financial, scientific and evolutionary differences between those eras, how do you match them ? Send Josh back to that time ? Bring those boys into our time ? Have them meet as they are ? Its a fruitless task.

i take everyone as they are/were in inter generational hypos

ppl say, oh, there were shws in other generations too and they got beaten up, but how do those guys compare to the giants of recent times like aj, vitali, lewis, bowe, etc.

did willard and canera have the beating of these guys? at least a few of them? who were the other best early giants?

[jamamb]

and btw wilder is 6'7 with an 83 inch reach and he usually weighs around 230, despite weighing much lower last time due to what he says was illness

this man would be enormous in most generations

[oogiebe]

and btw wilder is 6'7 with an 83 inch reach and he usually weighs around 230, despite weighing much lower last time due to what he says was illness

this man would be enormous in most generations

Absolutely %

[jamamb]

i feel like having shw size, lets say 6'6 240 in shape, with an 80+ inch reach, is certanly an advantage over someone who is cruiser or lhw sized. it doesnt mean insermountable, but an advantage.

a lot of top hws of past eras would, if taken in there actual size, be no larger then cruisers or lhws of today. ppl rightfully dont act like today the cws and lhws would be at no disadvanatge, or that somehow theyd actually have the advantage by being smaller. that would be odd talk. no one wants aj vs bivol