BoxRec

Kalan wrote:I don't go by the division but by the boxer... Right now, there's a lot really great fighters out there in so many divisions...

And right now there's a lot of great Heavyweights... But Lomachenko is still the greatest boxer in the game.

Lomachenko can do things no heavyweight could, purely because of their weight. The man is a magician/acrobat. That's why I like the lighter guys.

With some exceptions, I prefer watching 130-175. Heavyweights are quite awkward.

Absolutely. It's the division where, at it's best it's beautiful, but at it's worst... you can get away with a lot, just by being a really huge, strong guy who is okay at boxing!

My preference for the heavyweight division is that it's always been the division that is most talked about, especially beyond the world class level. So it's the main division where I perpetually know most of the top 150 fighters.

Lackeos wrote:My preference for the heavyweight division is that it's always been the division that is most talked about, especially beyond the world class level. So it's the main division where I perpetually know most of the top 150 fighters.

I admit it, based on this post, I am a confirmed casual fan and proud of it.

Lackeos wrote:My preference for the heavyweight division is that it's always been the division that is most talked about, especially beyond the world class level. So it's the main division where I perpetually know most of the top 150 fighters.

Are you serious ? I know 30, in the best case 40 HW fighters. I am not sure whether I know 150 active boxers in all weight divisions.
You are a genuine fan (if you were serious, of course).

I'd go so far as to say 250 as a conservative estimate. Not necessarily in any great depth you understand, but I could probably give you at least a few basic facts. Include heavyweights I've merely just heard of you can double that number at least.

My knowledge of other weight divisions is beyond pitiful by comparison.

Thinking about those numbers that might have been an exaggeration although probably not much of one.

I admit, maybe I should say I confess to being much more of a HW fan. Regarding the lower weight divisions I'm usually only interested if the best fight the best or one of the fighters is a KO artist.

Regarding the HWs I like any fight between 2 big blocks. I probably know about 200 current HWs as well. Not bragging, maybe the opposite.

Tony1244 wrote:I admit, maybe I should say I confess to being much more of a HW fan. Regarding the lower weight divisions I'm usually only interested if the best fight the best or one of the fighters is a KO artist.

Regarding the HWs I like any fight between 2 big blocks. I probably know about 200 current HWs as well. Not bragging, maybe the opposite.

200 ? Are you a journalist or a commentator ?

ValMar wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:I admit, maybe I should say I confess to being much more of a HW fan. Regarding the lower weight divisions I'm usually only interested if the best fight the best or one of the fighters is a KO artist.

Regarding the HWs I like any fight between 2 big blocks. I probably know about 200 current HWs as well. Not bragging, maybe the opposite.

200 ? Are you a journalist or a commentator ?

Neither. Just now I looked up the top 200-300 HWs on this site and it may be closer to 100-150, I don't know. I realize there's no good excuse for knowing Sosnowski, Julius Long, or Jeremy Bates.

Tony1244 wrote:People say the problem in the HW division is lack of talent.

No, its lack of fights.

Failed PEDs, ducking and injuries are the 3 problems.

If Wilder, Wlad, Joshua, Browne, Pulev, Miller, Ortiz, Parker, Povetkin all fought each other 3 to 4 times a year, the interest, not necessarily the talent would go thru the roof.

This,so many great match ups to be made but politics etc spoil it.

Tony1244 wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:I admit, maybe I should say I confess to being much more of a HW fan. Regarding the lower weight divisions I'm usually only interested if the best fight the best or one of the fighters is a KO artist.

Regarding the HWs I like any fight between 2 big blocks. I probably know about 200 current HWs as well. Not bragging, maybe the opposite.

200 ? Are you a journalist or a commentator ?

Neither. Just now I looked up the top 200-300 HWs on this site and it may be closer to 100-150, I don't know. I realize there's no good excuse for knowing Sosnowski, Julius Long, or Jeremy Bates.

Top 10 recent HWs is a pretty hot list, but the rest is very, very questionable.....

bigjack wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:People say the problem in the HW division is lack of talent.

No, its lack of fights.

Failed PEDs, ducking and injuries are the 3 problems.

If Wilder, Wlad, Joshua, Browne, Pulev, Miller, Ortiz, Parker, Povetkin all fought each other 3 to 4 times a year, the interest, not necessarily the talent would go thru the roof.

This,so many great match ups to be made but politics etc spoil it.

Yes !

What's this undefeated guy like that is fighting szpilka? I've heard the name, but never seen him. With so many super heavy fans here I figure I'll take advantage. What's his style? One punch power, volume or poor opposition? Has he ever been dropped or hurt? Defense? Speed? Stamina? Best fight to watch? Thanks

I saw Adam Kownacki live on the undercard of Wilder-Szpilka. Decent plodder, nothing special. He beat a guy named Kelly who didn't look like he wanted to get too involved. His resume lacks anything close to a contender. No info on his chin due to that fact. If I had to bet, I'd go with Szpilka. Seems like a poor man's version of him.

His defense doesn't seem good. Fair, but not great power. His opponent Kelly had limited talent but perhaps a good chin though.

Tony1244 wrote:I saw Adam Kownacki live on the undercard of Wilder-Szpilka. Decent plodder, nothing special. He beat a guy named Kelly who didn't look like he wanted to get too involved. His resume lacks anything close to a contender. No info on his chin due to that fact. If I had to bet, I'd go with Szpilka. Seems like a poor man's version of him.

His defense doesn't seem good. Fair, but not great power. His opponent Kelly had limited talent but perhaps a good chin though.

Tony1244 wrote:I saw Adam Kownacki live on the undercard of Wilder-Szpilka. Decent plodder, nothing special. He beat a guy named Kelly who didn't look like he wanted to get too involved. His resume lacks anything close to a contender. No info on his chin due to that fact. If I had to bet, I'd go with Szpilka. Seems like a poor man's version of him.

His defense doesn't seem good. Fair, but not great power. His opponent Kelly had limited talent but perhaps a good chin though.

Kownacki is a white Chris Arreola... He's fat, even rotund you could say... He's out-of-shape, quick hands, fair power in both hands, can take a hard shot. He's going to run into a storm when he get 20 wins and hits the ranked contenders... They're going to blow him away like the rest of his ilk... Andy Ruiz is the only fat boy who boxes real good.. But he doesn't get any fights.. He got worked by the judges when he finally did get a big fight in New Zealand.

Nobody cares about you if you don't look the part.

Yes, in fact it's pretty much the only division I follow. The HW really is the ultimate division because it has fewer limits. You see the most supreme physical specimens in the sport. I could probably sum up my feelings in just one thought and that is that there's a reason for weight classes, otherwise guys over 220 lbs would almost always be the champ. Yes, I know size isn't everything but, without divisions,it would likely take someone with exceptional (and I mean exceptional) talent/stamina to be competitive weighing less than 200 lbs.

The last Lineal Heavyweight Champion to weight under 200 pounds was MIchael Spinks in 1985 when he weighed 199.75... That was 32 years ago.

We may never see a guy that small ever win the Lineal Heavyweight TItle again... Joshua just won it weighing 250 over an opponent weighing 240... Parker weighs in the 240's... Wilder tops out at 232 and I don't think he's going to win it due to his lack of physicality.

Earnie Shavers is often cited as the hardest hitting fighter, possibly of all time, Leroy Caldwell who fought them all in the seventies said Shavers hit him harder than George Foreman did. We surely wouldn't consider George to be too small to compete with the modern era heavies, but Shavers weighed about 15 stone or 210lbs and stood only 6 feet.

Earnie wasn't ever a champion but Evander Holyfield was and he was of similar dimensions. I wouldn't dismiss a peak Evander Holyfield's chances against Joshua and I'd fancy him to dismantle Wilder.

All I'm saying is I wouldn't be so quick to write off the little guy.

Thanks for that. I've at least heard of most of them but a substantial number are unknown to me.

I'll be adding those to my watch list.

"If you build it they will come."

Line from a movie, but it amazes me how poorly prompted boxing is, especially the HW division.

If there was a tournament with such fights as Ortiz-Povetkin, Pulev-Wilder, people would be glued like they haven't been in years or ever.

Heavyweights attract the attention of the casual fan. If they had a good HW tournament where The Best fought The Best they wouldn't be casual fans for long.

Like most I grew up watching the big guys fight. A good fight at heavy is a bit of a rarity but it's awesome when it goes down!

I don't have a specific weight I like tbh, I just like good fights. Over the years I've always been drawn to fights at the lower weights particularly feather. I grew up a massive Naz and MAB fan. After that I was a follower of Scott Harrison and my favourite fighter these days is Carl Frampton! Don't know why but I a,ways end up drew to the lower weights. It's not a weight thing though as I'm a fan of the individual.