Thoughts now on size of HWs compared to other eras?

[Controversial]

Always a topic of debate. Quite often argued that guys like Marciano and Frazier could compete with todays heavyweights, has anyone changed their mind on this? We can point to blown up CW Usyk beating man mountain AJ but then we see Fury weighing 20 stone and making a 6’7” 17 stone Wilder look fairly small. Are today’s heavyweights now too big when it comes to fairly comparing eras like the 1950s etc ? Or do you think the skill sets outweighs the physical advantages?

[Counter-puncher]

not enough debate around this subject

[Controversial]

not enough debate around this subject

what do you think?

[HomicideHenry]

A good little man can beat a rather large man without much difficulty. The problem is these days the athleticism and skills has caught up with the size, whereas in earlier eras the big men were not all that athletic or skillful.

A sharp fast quick-footed skillful boxer will almost always out box a giant one-dimensional heavyweight who is too slow (ie, Usyk vs Joshua) but that is not always the case historically (ie, Loughran vs Carnera).

These days? Ehhh. We've had some really dominant big men who were skillful and athletic. Lennox Lewis, the Klitschko brothers, and now Tyson Fury. I don't necessarily include Joshua or Wilder in that because they've already lost or have demonstrated flaws that could have been capitalized on. They're tall/big but either incomplete fighters or have some sort of mental or emotional weakness.

Much as I like a lot of the great fighters from yesterday there are very few who I think could have presented problems to Lennox Lewis, the Klitschko brothers and Tyson Fury. Too big, too talented, too athletic, too skillful.

Take those three or four men out of the equation, however, I can see Jack Dempsey and others from the past being able to knock around the likes of Joshua and these other big guys. Any man over 180 lb can knock out any man in the world if he hits them just right. And let's face it the smaller you are the more quicker and faster you are then these guys who weigh over 250 lb. They can get to a big man quicker than a big man can get to them.

It's all about the hypothetical matchups.

[Controversial]

A sharp fast quick-footed skillful boxer will almost always out box a giant one-dimensional heavyweight who is too slow (ie, Usyk vs Joshua) but that is not always the case historically (ie, Loughran vs Carnera).

The thing is Usyk isn't small, he's 6'3" with a 78" reach and around the 220lb mark, the same size as Ali and Foreman in the 1970s, he just seems small compared to guys like AJ and Fury. Foreman looked like a beast in those days. Have you changed your mind on guys like Marciano then? Didn't you always argue in previous years he would beat the modern day HWs?

[HomicideHenry]

A sharp fast quick-footed skillful boxer will almost always out box a giant one-dimensional heavyweight who is too slow (ie, Usyk vs Joshua) but that is not always the case historically (ie, Loughran vs Carnera).

The thing is Usyk isn't small, he's 6'3" with a 78" reach and around the 220lb mark, the same size as Ali and Foreman in the 1970s, he just seems small compared to guys like AJ and Fury.

One of my favorite videos floating around the internet is the heavyweight title match between Tommy Burns and Bill Squires with former champion Jim Jeffries as referee. Squires was roughly 5'11"-6'0" and 190-200 pounds. Jeffries was 6'2" and probably 240-250 in the video, and made both men look like dwarves.

For all intents and purposes Jeffries was like the Joshua, Wilder, Fury of his day. By the 1970s heavyweights got to Jeffries size on average. Now a guy like Jeffries would be considered small.

[DrDuke]

Size is an advantage. Good boxers can use it, bad ones can't, simply as that.

A good small man beats a bad big man. A good small man can beat a good big man, it depends strictly on how good each of them is.

Tua was flattening the bigger and longer guys, while Lewis masterfully used his range against him. Chagaev and Haye schooled Valuev, but were comfortably outboxed by Klitschko.

When you're like Primo Carnera or David Price, the size won't help much. The likes of Lewis, Bowe, Klitschko and Fury showed how the size advantage should be executed.

When class of boxers is about the same, the size advantage can be crucial. Holyfield-Bowe is a one of the best examples.

[oogiebe]

not enough debate around this subject

exactly my first reaction!

[funso banjo baby]

An interesting thing to do.....look at footage of Klitschko v Arreola

Then look at footage of Arreola v Brian Minto


It's extraordinary

[evrenb]

An interesting thing to do.....look at footage of Klitschko v Arreola

Then look at footage of Arreola v Brian Minto


It's extraordinary

Then look at Chris Byrd v Vitali

[Ezzard]

Lot of really good points made here.

Size is an advantage if you are good enough and you know how to use it. And, yes, Usyk is a big man by historical standards. Also, when the fighters are in a similar class then size can be the deciding factor.

When we discuss ATG H2H bouts then we're always matching quality with quality. Some will always buck the trend. Some prefer fighting big men and struggle more with smaller men. But for the most part being bigger is an advantage.

[Ambling Alp II]

I agree that size is an advantage for Mythical fights. In that world, a 240 pound guy has an 25 pound "advantage" on a guy weighing 215 right off the bat. No reason to think about it.

But what about in real life?
Isn't it possible that at a certain point that a fighter weighs too much? (Even if it isn't fat?) If not , then why is the biggest fighter in the world never the best heavyweight in the world? Ever.

We can argue the skill vs size thing to death.
Ultimately, the only real way to know is to look at real fights where one heavyweight was significantly bigger than the other heavyweight and let the chips fall where they may.

[Controversial]

But what about in real life?
Isn't it possible that at a certain point that a fighter weighs too much? (Even if it isn't fat?) If not , then why is the biggest fighter in the world never the best heavyweight in the world? Ever.

What I find bizarre with Tyson Fury is he carries a lot of flab around his body but that extra bulk works to his advantage. He could train his arse off and get down to maybe 230lbs, be solid at the weight but I think he would be worse off. Conversely Wilder bulked up to 240 and was probably worse off stamina wise but at 210 he would've been pushed around like a rag doll.

But of course size alone means little if you can't fight, a middleweight could knock out at 300lb fighter no problem.

[Ambling Alp II]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

[DrDuke]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Smaller weight, superior speed and stamina wouldn't help Wilder. He can't neither box, nor fight like Fury. However, Fury didn't need extra-pounds in the 3rd bout.

[Controversial]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Furys dad said he was too light in the 1st fight (256lb) and needed to bulk up and the extra weight worked. Wilder obviously felt he needed to bulk up too from 212 to 231 and 238 for the next two fights. Fury uses he size and weight very well, he leans on fighters and utilises those advantages, heavier is better for Fury. Also Fury fought more aggressively in 2nd and 3rd fights, that’s where his size came into its own.

[Ambling Alp II]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Smaller weight, superior speed and stamina wouldn't help Wilder. He can't neither box, nor fight like Fury. However, Fury didn't need extra-pounds in the 3rd bout.

Superior speed and stamina would have helped him. Not saying he would have won anyway. The main reason that he lost is that Fury is a little better than him.

[Ambling Alp II]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Furys dad said he was too light in the 1st fight (256lb) and needed to bulk up and the extra weight worked. Wilder obviously felt he needed to bulk up too from 212 to 231 and 238 for the next two fights. Fury uses he size and weight very well, he leans on fighters and utilises those advantages, heavier is better for Fury. Also Fury fought more aggressively in 2nd and 3rd fights, that’s where his size came into its own.

Fury's dad? Wilder flet the need to bulk ? Well it looks like he was wrong.

[DrDuke]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Smaller weight, superior speed and stamina wouldn't help Wilder. He can't neither box, nor fight like Fury. However, Fury didn't need extra-pounds in the 3rd bout.

Superior speed and stamina would have helped him. Not saying he would have won anyway. The main reason that he lost is that Fury is a little better than him.

As little as in every aspect, besides punching power.

[Controversial]

Maybe. But that is your opinion. Fury might be better off if he was lighter.
Would Wilder have been pushed around like a rag doll? How we know that? If he was lighter, he probably would have had better speed and stamina. He would have been able to throw more punches and would have had a better chance. He weighed 212 for the first fight which was the fight where Wilder did the best. Look at How many guys Wilder beat that weighed more than him.

Furys dad said he was too light in the 1st fight (256lb) and needed to bulk up and the extra weight worked. Wilder obviously felt he needed to bulk up too from 212 to 231 and 238 for the next two fights. Fury uses he size and weight very well, he leans on fighters and utilises those advantages, heavier is better for Fury. Also Fury fought more aggressively in 2nd and 3rd fights, that’s where his size came into its own.

Fury's dad? Wilder flet the need to bulk ? Well it looks like he was wrong.

Fury was right, Wilder was wrong

[Ambling Alp II]

I looked up the WBA, WBC, IBF, and WBO heavyweight title fights, starting with Larry Holmes winning the WBC title in 1978. Obviously only counted fights where more than one title was at stake once.
From there I added up the fight where one fighter weighed less than 225 and the other weighed more than 225. (There were a few where a guy weighed exactly 225, I didn't count those.) I apologize if the total is slightly off.

Anyway, here are the results:

The guy weighing less than 225 won 39 fights.
The guy weighing more than 225 won 27 fights.
There were three draws.

[evrenb]

I looked up the WBA, WBC, IBF, and WBO heavyweight title fights, starting with Larry Holmes winning the WBC title in 1978. Obviously only counted fights where more than one title was at stake once.
From there I added up the fight where one fighter weighed less than 225 and the other weighed more than 225. (There were a few where a guy weighed exactly 225, I didn't count those.) I apologize if the total is slightly off.

Anyway, here are the results:

The guy weighing less than 225 won 39 fights.
The guy weighing more than 225 won 26 fights.
There were two draws.

That's very commendable. I would be interested in 2000 to 2020....

[Controversial]

I looked up the WBA, WBC, IBF, and WBO heavyweight title fights, starting with Larry Holmes winning the WBC title in 1978. Obviously only counted fights where more than one title was at stake once.
From there I added up the fight where one fighter weighed less than 225 and the other weighed more than 225. (There were a few where a guy weighed exactly 225, I didn't count those.) I apologize if the total is slightly off.

Anyway, here are the results:

The guy weighing less than 225 won 39 fights.
The guy weighing more than 225 won 26 fights.
There were two draws.

These comparisons can be interesting but are also kind of irrelevant. You could do the same from 1935-1978 and get a different set of results. Or from 2000-21. The fact is HWs today are on average far bigger than ever. At 221lbs, Usyk was the second lightest HW that AJ has fought (by 2lbs). Holmes fought a few guys under 200lbs, or just over. Foreman fought many guys under 200lbs, as did Liston. Now of course it's mean nothing if the opponent is bigger and can't fight, or smaller and can fight, but we just don't get 200lb HWs dominating anymore.

Todays fighters and trainers quite often point to size being a factor too, for all his tough talk at the time former CW champ Tony Bellew quickly backed down from wanting to fight Wilder and said he would've been too small to fight him. Bellew was bigger than most of the old school HWs at 6'3" so these guys obviously know it makes a huge difference.

[Ezzard]

Nobody is arguing that size beats everything. We would need to find a list of examples in which the fighters are by consensus generally evenly matched. Or thought to be going in.

[evrenb]

Wilder fought comfortably at 212lbs ..is he too small?