Page 2 of 2
Re: Boxers who are/were small for their division?
Posted: 20 Aug 2015, 10:34
by hoagylt
Boxing Prospect wrote:zojo, wrote:Joey Gamache
Why not heavyweight? Steve Cunningham probably weighed less last night in the ring than the two cruiserweights that fought on the undercard.
Due to the historically small ones, I.e. Marciano, Hart, Burns, Dempsey who would all be cruiserweight/light heavyweight in today's world. Cunningham is pretty similar size wise to Ali is he not?
In today's world guy's like Dempsey would still be a heavy.With the nutrition,better food and sports science.Ali was a bigger guy than most think.Marciano,Hart and Burns still would be small,in my opinion.
Re: Boxers who are/were small for their division?
Posted: 20 Aug 2015, 13:51
by Steo
"Baby" Jake Matlala was very small, only 4'10". He captured titles at flyweight and light flyweight. He was a true little warrior
Re: Boxers who are/were small for their division?
Posted: 20 Aug 2015, 15:03
by Rexob
Steo wrote:"Baby" Jake Matlala was very small, only 4'10". He captured titles at flyweight and light flyweight. He was a true little warrior
I remember him fighting Dave McAuley great battle that was.
Re: Boxers who are/were small for their division?
Posted: 21 Aug 2015, 12:24
by Cholo_cws
Dick Tiger at light-heavy, Emile Griffith at middle, Carmen Basilio at middle.