Page 3 of 3
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 04:47
by jezzamundo
tiny_acres wrote:Ricky_ wrote:There needs to be less weight classes at the lower end of the spectrum and at least 1 more at the top end.
At this point in time there's virtually no place in the sport for men who are around 6'2 & weigh 210. In days gone by they would have been Heavyweight's but the current champion is 6ft 9, with a 216cm reach, and n average weight (from last 4 fights) of 261lb.
To put that into perspective;
Muhammad Ali: 6ft 3, 198cm reach, weighed about 206 in his prime.
Joe Frazier: 5ft 11.5, 185cm reach, weighed about 203lb in his prime.
George Foreman: 6ft 3.5, 199cm reach, weighed 220 in his prime.
Rocky Marciano: 5ft 10.5, 173cm reach, weighed 184lb* in his prime. (Fury's heaviest is 90lb greater).
Those are just some of the widely accepted greatest heavyweights of all time, who if they were around today, would be negotiating some massive, massive physical disadvantages against crap champions like Fury who have merely learned to utilise their size but trail miles behind on skill. When we look at greatness over the years, people ask the question how Sugar Ray Robinson would fair against the Welterweights or LMW's of today, like Pacquiao, Mayweather, Hearns, Canelo. Nobody asks how Robinson would do against Kovalev or Marco Huck, even though the size difference is on a par with the great Heavyweigths of the past and today's super HWs.
imo;
Raise supermiddle 2lb to 170
Make Light Heavyweight 185
Cruiser up to 214
Good post
I do agree that there needs to be a consolidation of some lower weight divisions.Hell if you skip a meal or take a dump you just lost 2 weight divisions
Hard to believe that Big George Foreman in the early 70's was considered a monster in size.
Today we would say that a fighter of his size is too small to compete with the Fury's and Klitschko's of the world.
Man have times have changed.I think the sport needs to change with it.Your proposal of weight divisions is close to what it should be.If we moved the cruiser division to 214-215 you could see a bunch of heavyweights suddenly getting in shape to make that division.
Anyone who would say this clearly doesn't know what they're talking about. Fury was decked by natural cruiserweight Steve Cunningham - imagine what arguably the hardest hitting heavyweight champion in history would do to him?
I think the thing that's influencing a lot of people's opinion here is that there hasn't been a truly elite small heavyweight since the prime years of Evander Holyfield. The problem isn't that the big guys are too big, it's that the little guys aren't good enough to overcome the size disparity. That said, some more vigilant refereeing would help - Wlad should never have gotten away with fighting the way he did against Povetkin. I have to wonder how that fight would have gone if Wlad was warned and had points deducted for his non-stop clinching.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 05:16
by Ricky_
jezzamundo wrote:tiny_acres wrote:Ricky_ wrote:There needs to be less weight classes at the lower end of the spectrum and at least 1 more at the top end.
At this point in time there's virtually no place in the sport for men who are around 6'2 & weigh 210. In days gone by they would have been Heavyweight's but the current champion is 6ft 9, with a 216cm reach, and n average weight (from last 4 fights) of 261lb.
To put that into perspective;
Muhammad Ali: 6ft 3, 198cm reach, weighed about 206 in his prime.
Joe Frazier: 5ft 11.5, 185cm reach, weighed about 203lb in his prime.
George Foreman: 6ft 3.5, 199cm reach, weighed 220 in his prime.
Rocky Marciano: 5ft 10.5, 173cm reach, weighed 184lb* in his prime. (Fury's heaviest is 90lb greater).
Those are just some of the widely accepted greatest heavyweights of all time, who if they were around today, would be negotiating some massive, massive physical disadvantages against crap champions like Fury who have merely learned to utilise their size but trail miles behind on skill. When we look at greatness over the years, people ask the question how Sugar Ray Robinson would fair against the Welterweights or LMW's of today, like Pacquiao, Mayweather, Hearns, Canelo. Nobody asks how Robinson would do against Kovalev or Marco Huck, even though the size difference is on a par with the great Heavyweigths of the past and today's super HWs.
imo;
Raise supermiddle 2lb to 170
Make Light Heavyweight 185
Cruiser up to 214
Good post
I do agree that there needs to be a consolidation of some lower weight divisions.Hell if you skip a meal or take a dump you just lost 2 weight divisions
Hard to believe that Big George Foreman in the early 70's was considered a monster in size.
Today we would say that a fighter of his size is too small to compete with the Fury's and Klitschko's of the world.
Man have times have changed.I think the sport needs to change with it.Your proposal of weight divisions is close to what it should be.If we moved the cruiser division to 214-215 you could see a bunch of heavyweights suddenly getting in shape to make that division.
Anyone who would say this clearly doesn't know what they're talking about. Fury was decked by natural cruiserweight Steve Cunningham - imagine what arguably the hardest hitting heavyweight champion in history would do to him?
I think the thing that's influencing a lot of people's opinion here is that there hasn't been a truly elite small heavyweight since the prime years of Evander Holyfield. The problem isn't that the big guys are too big, it's that the little guys aren't good enough to overcome the size disparity. That said, some more vigilant refereeing would help - Wlad should never have gotten away with fighting the way he did against Povetkin. I have to wonder how that fight would have gone if Wlad was warned and had points deducted for his non-stop clinching.
Fury was awful against Cunningham and hasn't fought anything other than 'jab/run' since then. He could potentially beat the greats mentioned above just using those same tactics and a ridiculous reach advantage for 12 rounds. If Fury actually came to fight he wouldn't be champ.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 05:24
by Batley18
There are too many weight classes at the moment imo, so I definitely wouldn't add any more.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 05:52
by jezzamundo
Error, please delete.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 05:58
by jezzamundo
Ricky_ wrote:jezzamundo wrote:tiny_acres wrote:
Good post
I do agree that there needs to be a consolidation of some lower weight divisions.Hell if you skip a meal or take a dump you just lost 2 weight divisions
Hard to believe that Big George Foreman in the early 70's was considered a monster in size.
Today we would say that a fighter of his size is too small to compete with the Fury's and Klitschko's of the world.
Man have times have changed.I think the sport needs to change with it.Your proposal of weight divisions is close to what it should be.If we moved the cruiser division to 214-215 you could see a bunch of heavyweights suddenly getting in shape to make that division.
Anyone who would say this clearly doesn't know what they're talking about. Fury was decked by natural cruiserweight Steve Cunningham - imagine what arguably the hardest hitting heavyweight champion in history would do to him?
I think the thing that's influencing a lot of people's opinion here is that there hasn't been a truly elite small heavyweight since the prime years of Evander Holyfield. The problem isn't that the big guys are too big, it's that the little guys aren't good enough to overcome the size disparity. That said, some more vigilant refereeing would help - Wlad should never have gotten away with fighting the way he did against Povetkin. I have to wonder how that fight would have gone if Wlad was warned and had points deducted for his non-stop clinching.
Fury was awful against Cunningham and hasn't fought anything other than 'jab/run' since then.
He could potentially beat the greats mentioned above just using those same tactics and a ridiculous reach advantage for 12 rounds. If Fury actually came to fight he wouldn't be champ.
No, he couldn't/wouldn't. Wlad didn't lose to Fury because he is shorter with a shorter reach (although that did certainly play a part), he lost because he fought terribly and had no answer for Fury's tactics. Being shorter and lighter can be an advantage if you know how to use it. Tyson and Frazier regularly overcame massive reach disadvantages against good - or in the case of Ali, great - heavyweights.
Fury boxed very intelligently against Wlad and should be given credit. Wlad was truly awful, but Fury's skill-set and tactics had a big part to play.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 06:23
by Taki...
I think all the weight classes should and could be reconfigured. Adding more classes might be good for the ABCs but it just muddies the waters and spreads the talent pool even thinner. I say raise cruiser to 210 and work down from there. 190 LH, 175 SMW, 166 MW, etc. That way you can add a pound or two to all the lower weights too -- the differences between which are a ridiculous 3 or 4 pounds at the bottom end.
Re: Do we need more weightclasses between lightheavyweight and heavyweight?
Posted: 10 Dec 2015, 11:21
by Cap
It's not as much size as it is talent. Larry Gains, a skilled boxer who stood 6' 1" with a 77" reach and weighed around 200 pounds out-boxed the giant Carnera at 6' 5 1/2" tall with an 85" reach and 268 pounds. The problem now is you've got giants with mediocre skills fighting small heavies with mediocre to average skills.
As for altering the weight classes, it's a nice idea, but with the crooks controlling the sport now, it ain't going to happen. Too much money to be had in sanctioning fees; championships, even bogus ones, help promoters sell fights; and boxers love collecting and wearing championship belts. The only way you'll see things the way they should be is if you play Title Bout Championship Boxing on your PC. The real world of boxing is only going to see more and more diluted championships unless some billionaire boxing fan buys up the WBC, WBA and IBF and merges them into some kind of International Boxing Union that would have one champion in each revised weight class and pay major media to promote the new organisation and ignore the others.
