BoxRec

I challenge anyone to find someone who is as equally(or close to it) skilled as them in boxing who outweighs them by 70ish pounds, has somewhere around or over 10 inches in reach arguably as athletic and know how to use their size advantage and spar or fight them and tell me how it goes.

These guys are greats in their time but as already mentioned they would fight at SMW or LHW, size does matter in the real world even if you're the more skilled. Klitscko/Bowe/Lewis would all use their length to keep Dempsey and Marciano on the end of their jab and tie up when they were in close and there is nothing either of those guys could do to stop if because they would physically be out matched in a wrestling contest on the inside.

I agree that size is a big factor. And is a big advantage. And generally speaking the greatest reigning HWs tended to have a size advantage during their careers.

But In Rocky and Jack we are looking at two of the very best HWs ever. Dempsey would more likely struggle with a smaller man than a bigger man. He would also be the fastest and most powerful puncher Lewis, Bowe, Wlad or Vitali ever faced.

Ezzard wrote:I agree that size is a big factor. And is a big advantage. And generally speaking the greatest reigning HWs tended to have a size advantage during their careers.

But In Rocky and Jack we are looking at two of the very best HWs ever. Dempsey would more likely struggle with a smaller man than a bigger man. He would also be the fastest and most powerful puncher Lewis, Bowe, Wlad or Vitali ever faced.

But with 10 ounce gloves on and such bigger men I would be confident in saying that his power wouldn't look the same. I also don't anyone can really be sure that Rocky and Jack would be the hardest punchers they have faced due to simple physics (and the fact that Lewis and Vitali fought each other). I just feel if Rocky is hurt by two(admittedly great punchers) LHWs there is a strong case to be made that these monsters of men who are huge in comparison to him could hurt him just as bad and probably worse.

As for depth in boxing, when was the last time you heard of a guy taking up boxing later in life(ie in his 20s as Rocky did and IIRC so did Wellard) and winning meaningful championships?

Haye KO'd HWs. Holyfield did too.

And why are the wearing 10 ounce gloves? Why aren't these guys wearing the old gloves? Just saying...makes no difference to my opinion.

Lewis was hurt by guys who were not as good punchers as Rocky and Jack.

Obviously there is a different school of thought on how HWs should train today. They often come in big on purpose. They believe it helps them in certain fights. I don't really know if it's right or wrong. I believe that fighters would always adapt and that Dempsey would have cut through any set of contenders from any era of the sport...just like he did in his own era.

Ezzard wrote:Haye KO'd HWs. Holyfield did too.

And why are the wearing 10 ounce gloves? Why aren't these guys wearing the old gloves? Just saying...makes no difference to my opinion.

Lewis was hurt by guys who were not as good punchers as Rocky and Jack.

Obviously there is a different school of thought on how HWs should train today. They often come in big on purpose. They believe it helps them in certain fights. I don't really know if it's right or wrong. I believe that fighters would always adapt and that Dempsey would have cut through any set of contenders from any era of the sport...just like he did in his own era.

We will have to agree to disagree then, but if Dempsey is wearing the old style glove then so are the big guys which doesn't help either Jack or Rocky, also Haye and Holy are bigger than Dempsey or Marciano a good 20lbs or so.

I don't believe so. Holy and Haye had methods of bulking up that Dempsey would utilise too.

Do these giants have some sort of modern training or protein supplement for their jawbones? Because being 6'6' and 245lb didn't seem to make Willard's jaw anymore solid versus Jack Dempsey's fury.

'Oh but Willard wasn't as skilled . . .'

Vitali Klitschko's stance and technique is straight out of turn-of-the-century boxing. As far as King & Queen Klitschko go, having watched them gas versus Lewis and Brewster inside 6 and 5 rds a piece, I would love to see them show how superior they are to Jess Willard by going twenty-six rounds in Cuban heat, versus a 225lb strongman hitting them back to the head & body.

Tuan_Jim wrote:Do these giants have some sort of modern training or protein supplement for their jawbones? Because being 6'6' and 245lb didn't seem to make Willard's jaw anymore solid versus Jack Dempsey's fury.

'Oh but Willard wasn't as skilled . . .'

Vitali Klitschko's stance and technique is straight out of turn-of-the-century boxing. As far as King & Queen Klitschko go, having watched them gas versus Lewis and Brewster inside 6 and 5 rds a piece, I would love to see them show how superior they are to Jess Willard by going twenty-six rounds in Cuban heat, versus a 225lb strongman hitting them back to the head & body.

I absolutely agree with this [in bold].

I also think Willard would have a great chance with Wlad. I wouldn't write him off against Lewis either.

The Willard-Vitali comparison is something I have mentioned before; though we know Willard had great stamina and a better jab. (Though I don't Willard would have much chance vs Lewis)

tuan made good point about stamina. Some people seem to think (without really thinking about it) that the sport has "evolved" into something better. It hasn't in a long, long time.

To touch on the idea that Dempsey and Marciano being SWMs and light heavyweights is just silly. They trained down to get to the 180s. That could easily have fought in the 200s. Interesting to think how well the Klitschkos would have done in another era without steroids/drugs.

Again, the difference in size between Valuev and the Klitschkos is about the same as the Klitschkos and Demspey and Marciano.
The Klitschkos had much more ability than Valuev and probably would have beaten him.
Marciano and Demspey had much more ability than the Klitschkos and would have beaten them.

At a certain point weight stops being an advantage. At another point it starts to become a disadvantage.

No, I cannot or will not believe that those yonder-year fighters could have defeated today's top guys.

I'm only 37, so I've seen all fighters from early, early 80's till today. And I've watched so many old fights as a kid that I've seen all major fights from 30's through 70's. My problem is that no matter how much I respect a fighter from the past, the sport has evolved with much more technique. It really, really has. And we won't even get into how much physically larger and stronger today's guys are. That would be a huge factor.

I think Joe Louis was tough enough that he could have beat some contenders in today's game: like Chris Arreola, Sam Peter, etc. Marciano was much younger than Louis when they fought. I love Rocky Marciano -- the great Italian undefeated Heavyweight. But he was a tiny guy. Very tiny. Tyson, being about the same height, has weighed 225 plus in some of his championship fights. That's about 40 lbs (225-185) greater than Rocky.

And 225 in today's heavyweight game is super small. I think Marciano would have been a great Super Light Heavy in today's game. Dempsey did not, in my opinion, have near as much boxing ability as Marciano. Different era also. Their technique was even worse. Hey, I'm not saying these old-timers could not go out on the street and kick most people's asses. The difference is conditioning and training these days. And vast improvements in diet and nutritional science that athletes in every sport benefit from.

As for size, what I said before.

Joe Louis might have beat some of the top contenders? There were guys in his day just as big as the guys now. Louis rolled over them.

Technique is better? Vitali Klitschko? Samuel Peter? Seriously?

Training? Yes things have changed. However, there is one more than one way to train. You can get great results doing things that aren't high tech.
Is Wladimir's stamina as good as Dempsey or Marciano?

birdman77 wrote: no matter how much I respect a fighter from the past, the sport has evolved with much more technique. It really, really has. And we won't even get into how much physically larger and stronger today's guys are. That would be a huge factor.

Can you explain specifically in clear terms the precise futuristic technique that the Klitschko brothers employ?

Show me Vitali Klitschko doing something that you don't see Bob Fitzsimmons and Gentleman Jim Corbett doing.

As far as the all-important strength. Do you think Corrie Sanders and Chris Byrd were stronger than the Klits? Or did they employ other tactics do with movement and punching, as opposed to wrestling and hugging.

None of this is new.

Pacheco's reasons why the old greats had no chance with Ali:

"Ali has everything—size, speed, style, the greatest body God ever blessed a man with," his doctor says. "Next to Ali, Marciano was a dwarf, Joe Louis was slow of foot and couldn't take a right, and Jack Dempsey? Christ, he only weighed 189 pounds at his peak." But as Ali's skills decline with age, Pacheco sounds increasingly worried. After the champion's listless performance against Ken Norton last year, Pacheco told him, "I wish you would quit now. I would be the happiest person in your entourage if you did." (Since 1970, Pacheco reveals, he has given Ali an injection of novocaine in the knuckles before each fight to dull the pain of his punches.)

Size is a major factor in his assessment.

And we all know how knowledgable about boxing Ferdie is.

He does also mention things like speed, style, ability to take a punch. I would add things like stamina, defense, technique, smarts, tenacity, power, ability to adapt, punching accurracy. There are many other things that you can add.

But he didn't. He tried to sidestep the whole issue by simply saying they were not big enough.

Ezzard wrote:But he didn't. He tried to sidestep the whole issue by simply saying they were not big enough.

He was saying it while on Muhammad Ali's payroll, Ezzard. What do you expect?

Manny Steward was another one for making wild proclamations about whoever was paying him. It's a theme that runs throughout boxing history. Whoever you're training is your best, most complete fighter ever. The other ones who don't make me money anymore didn't have what this guy has, etc etc.

To be fair to Pacheco, but he did talk about things other than size. It's right in the paragraph. He mentioned Ali's style and speed, said Louis had slow feet and couldn't take a right hand. (an exaggeration.)

He did blow off Dempsey and Marciano because of their lack of size, but seems to realize that there were other important factors.

Actually, Louis really wasn't much bigger than Dempsey (which Ferdie probably didn't know.)

Anyway, it is disappointing when you see people so obsessed with what the needle on the scale says. It's an indication that the person who says it has little knowledge of the long history of the sport and doesn't seem to have much interest in learning about it.

birdman77 wrote:No, I cannot or will not believe that those yonder-year fighters could have defeated today's top guys.

I'm only 37, so I've seen all fighters from early, early 80's till today. And I've watched so many old fights as a kid that I've seen all major fights from 30's through 70's. My problem is that no matter how much I respect a fighter from the past, the sport has evolved with much more technique. It really, really has. And we won't even get into how much physically larger and stronger today's guys are. That would be a huge factor.

I think Joe Louis was tough enough that he could have beat some contenders in today's game: like Chris Arreola, Sam Peter, etc. Marciano was much younger than Louis when they fought. I love Rocky Marciano -- the great Italian undefeated Heavyweight. But he was a tiny guy. Very tiny. Tyson, being about the same height, has weighed 225 plus in some of his championship fights. That's about 40 lbs (225-185) greater than Rocky.

And 225 in today's heavyweight game is super small. I think Marciano would have been a great Super Light Heavy in today's game. Dempsey did not, in my opinion, have near as much boxing ability as Marciano. Different era also. Their technique was even worse. Hey, I'm not saying these old-timers could not go out on the street and kick most people's asses. The difference is conditioning and training these days. And vast improvements in diet and nutritional science that athletes in every sport benefit from.

I'm sorry, you are wrong on practically all accounts. Louis was a very big heavyweight with a big frame .. . bigger than Haye, Holyfield, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Ruiz, Povetkin etc. He simply trained down for speed and stamina. There's footage of him at 230 and he looks in better shape than Povetkin or Stiverne do.

225 is tiny? So Wilder is tiny?

Technique and training have completely gone downhill, not the other way around. Even Wlad . . he's a very well conditioned heavyweight, but he can't go the pace Carnera went for 15 rounds.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Anyway, it is disappointing when you see people so obsessed with what the needle on the scale says. It's an indication that the person who says it has little knowledge of the long history of the sport and doesn't seem to have much interest in learning about it.

You've summed it up here. It is mystifying to me. Earlier in the thread, the user "birdman" writes the utterly absurd "(Jack Johnson's) 225 is super small by today's standards."

225lb.

"Super small."

Hilariously, that's actually the same weight Corrie Sanders was when he annihilated Wlad K. And at least 10lb or 15lb of that looked to be useless jiggling cellulite, which Birdman presumably believes somehow 'enhanced' his movement & punch power. Also, using that line of logic it follows that you approve of heavyweights weighing in at outrageous weights like Arreola and Stiverne did the other week, so that they are 'big' and 'strong' for one round and then end up battling exhaustion as well as each other.

This line about heavyweights needing to be 240lb to compete in modern boxing is a received opinion, and one that is gormlessly parrotted again and again on boxing forums.

I appreciate what you are saying. And no doubt (and no argument from me) that Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Jersey Joe, Rocky, look better on film than Vitali, Wlad, Bowe and Lennox.

BUT

These trainers that are being criticised earn their crust by preparing fighters. Steward knew more about preparing HWs than everyone who has posted on this thread put together. You can't just ignore that expertise. And I use Steward as an example. There are many trainers and coaches out there today with a lot of expertise.

HWs come in as they do for a reason. If coming in at 200 would make them better they would do it.

It's well known that Larry Holmes was trying to put on weight in his early career, concerned he might not be big enough to become champ.

I also accept that size isn't everything. But it's one of the biggest advantages you can have.

It's a great point Ezzard but I'm not sure how Manny could bring behemoths like Lennox and Wlad K down to 200lb. Still, did all the muscle Lennox had to lug around vs Mercer, Mavrovic and Holyfield II help him there? He blacked out after Mavrovic. Did Wlad's added muscle fule him when Brewster was assaulting him & he was gasping for breath? Certainly Manny couldn't stop Lennox coming in fat for Rahman and Vitali K. I wouldn't imagine he could control Moorer either, who seemed determined to box at his walk around weight and ultimately walked away from Stewart.

Moorer certainly was far more aggressive, sharp and active when he was lighter. The heavier he was, the less active. As an aside, the power shortage that a 70lb weight disadvantage should reveal wasn't there against the zeppelin-sized Mike White.

No doubt Lennox struggled with the fast paced fights. And I'd back the smaller Frazier against him who was what? About 205 (without looking it up).

But Marciano wasn't just small in weight he was short and with small arms. If Marciano gets into the second half of a fight with Lewis without a cut then I'd back him to win. But can he get there?

Dempsey, I believe would have loved fighting Lewis and Bowe... He would close the distance quickly and had the speed to land his shots. Briggs' left hook had Lennox looking untidy. Dempsey's would end the fight. But I can see that going wither way.

In all divisions of the sport being bigger tips everything in your favour. Bigger men are less effected by smaller men's punches. That's a general rule. Wlad is an exception. What skews HWs is that throughout history...a freakish big man has attracted money and interest...they weren't the best boxers. So they do get beaten.

What sets Lewis, Bowe, Vitali, Wlad apart is that they are good boxers too.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Anyway, it is disappointing when you see people so obsessed with what the needle on the scale says. It's an indication that the person who says it has little knowledge of the long history of the sport and doesn't seem to have much interest in learning about it.

Weight plays a huge part in determining outcomes. Obviously it's not everything and can be overcome by a certain level of talent and/or skill, but there is no reason why focusing on the size disparities (the idea of the thread is if relatively small heavyweights are good enough to overcome significantly bigger heavyweights) in these hypotheticals makes one's opinion any less worth while or reflects poorly on their knowledge.

You've summed it up here. It is mystifying to me. Earlier in the thread, the user "birdman" writes the utterly absurd "(Jack Johnson's) 225 is super small by today's standards."

225 was a high weight for Johnson and that version of him would probably be on the smaller side today. 6'0" and 205/210 is getting into cruiserweight territory, and I doubt that for most of his career Johnson would've had trouble making CW comfortably with weigh-ins the day before fights; he did have multiple fights in the 180s just before winning the HW title, and of course he won the title at 192 against a 5'7" opponent weighing 168 (lol).

I also don't think that statement is more absurd than mentioning Mike Tyson and David Tua as examples of small heavyweights who are comparable in size to Marciano and Dempsey.

Ezzard wrote: Bigger men are less effected by smaller men's punches. oo.

To the contrary, I can think of VERY FEW tall heavyweights with iron chins . . .they almost always have weak jaws. Willard and Vitali are exceptions to the the rule.

Based on what?

Besides, it's mass not height.