And considerably more talented than Willardgranberry wrote: At the same time boxing "expert" Goldman was trumpeting that Dempsey "wasn't big enough" to beat Ali and Larry Holmes (both of whom were considerably smaller than Jess Willard).
granberry wrote:Cannot agree.zslayton wrote:
Better nutrition, better health care, better ways to condition and train such as weight training. Plus, in the world of the American Heavyweight boxer at least, many of them come late to the sport after having played football or basketball most of their lives. Weight training is a big part of both sports.
Weight training is not good for boxing.
The better fighters in earlier times all used the pulley weights, which imitate punchiing motions with some resistance.
They also shadow boxed holding 2,4, or 5 lb weights in each hand.
The so-called 'nutrition' conisisting of steroids, growth hormones, etc is not better.
As has been pointed out, the more recent excuses for fighters lack stamina.
The modern idea of weight training for boxing is garbage.
The so-called heavyweights of recent years are all 20-30 pounds overweight as compared to what an in shape boxer would be in years past.
That illustrates the incompetence in training methods for boxing more recently.
"Fighters" who have no stamina and are 20 or more pounds overweight are not 'better.'
The difference today is the fighters have more modern methods, equipment, and have more quality muscle due to supplements, and weight and cable training through the use of free weights, bowflex, soloflex, and nautilus machines. The most glaring categories of comparison for proper analysis would embrace several issues. One must realize that there are advances in knowledge of nutrition, diet, and exercise equipment that are changing for the better approx., every 6 months. Fighters today have personal physical fitness trainers, like Holyfield’s Tim Hallmark, which is good and necessary. Years ago they feared weight training ONLY because they did not understand it. Old time trainers, some of whose backgrounds were simply physical education teachers, believed it made fighters "muscle-bound" which is one of the most misunderstood words. There is a way to train a fighter using free weights, cable work, and stretching techniques. Once each muscle group is developed properly and with the right fight teacher, and trainer, the fighter with a lot of boxing skill training, through sparring, working in front of the mirror, practicing all his techniques in offense, defense, and combination and power punching, will then be a superior fighter and can tap into extra power without sacrificing speed. If they can flex, control and separate each muscle group through training, this muscle control can be tapped into for speed and power. I teach this very well and have films of me hitting with more power in both hands than most any fighter today within 50 lbs. heavier. I have the films and films don’t lie.
Mike Tyson only trained his biceps and shoulders. Years have gone by where his build has atrophied, especially in his triceps, upper back, trapezius, and mid and lower back and abs and obliques. Don’t ever tell me boxing is not a bodybuilding contest, I know that, and I also know many muscular fighters cannot punch and many skinny ones can. But, with the right application of training, you can have the longevity of power. The fighters from the 60’s waned with too many fights and age. They did not know how to beat father time with supplements and modern training, so they burned out quicker with more fights and age setting in with only their courage and great skill winning for them. Boxing is half seconds and half inches. With fat in the wrong places you cannot move or execute power. Most 1960’s fighters had good biceps from plain boxing, but no real power in their triceps. The days of steak and eggs and cholesterol hell are supposed to be gone, yet look at the bodies of some of the top fighters today, they still haven’t learned because they don’t have the right people teaching them.
mrbassie wrote:I don't think the argument can be made that human beings are bigger these days as some do, I think that's nonsense. We can prove that human beings are built a little differently-for example taller, than they were several hundred years ago but we're talking a generation or two.
Essentially, heavyweights of today are bigger, in fact they're not, they're just heavier and that's because they lift weights and probably steroids has something to do with it also. But they're also slower and have far less stamina. I think if any heavy today had to fight at the pace of a Joe Frazier they may well collapse from exhaustion within five rounds let alone go fifteen. If you train to be fit you weigh less than if you train to be muscular.
That's interesting, because in the past couple years I've thought McCline has looked much more solid and lean and despite not losing any weight, and he looked like a monster against Peter.granberry wrote:MSG inspectors beefed up due to steroid allegations
BY TIM SMITH NY DAILY NEWS BOXING COLUMNIST October 7th 2007
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_ ... id_-1.html
The New York State Athletic Commission assigned two inspectors to the corner of heavyweight contender Jameel McCline for his match against WBC interim champion Samuel Peter at Madison Square Garden last night. The commission took the unusual action in light of the allegations first reported in the Daily News on Thursday that McCline received more than $12,000 worth of steroids, human growth hormone and other related drugs between 2005 and 2006.
George Ward, a former New York corrections officer and long-time inspector, and Bobby Wall, former chief inspector for the commission, worked McCline's corner and dressing room. They supervised his pre- and postfight drug tests.
McCline lost the fight to Peter in an unanimous decision.
Ron Scott Stevens, NYSAC chairman, said he took the extra measure to ensure that there are no problems, considering the fact that McCline's name has surfaced in the Albany County District Attorney's investigation into Internet steroid and drug distribution operations. Stevens decided to allow the fight to go on after consulting with lawyers from the New York Department of State.
McCline, 37, replaced Maskaev, the WBC heavyweight champion, after Maskaev pulled out of the mandatory defense against Peter because of a back injury. McCline became available when his match against Vitali Klitschko in Munich, Germany, on Sept. 22 was canceled because Klitschko injured his back and had to have surgery.
It isn't the only time that someone has taken extra precautions with McCline before a boxing match.
Rumors of McCline using steroids prompted heavyweight title contender Calvin Brock to ask his promoters to insist that McCline submit to random steroid tests during his preparation for their bout outdoors at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas on April 23, 2005.
"I didn't want to take a chance," Brock said. "I wanted everything in my fight with him to be fair and equal."
Keith Kizer, the executive director of the Nevada commission, said his office was not aware of any random steroid tests that McCline underwent while training for the fight with Brock. But according to Brock, he was told by one of McCline's sparring partners who was in camp the entire time with McCline that McCline was randomly tested three times during his training camp.
"This guy who was there told me that someone came three times and tested him, because everybody in the camp was talking about it," Brock said. "So I was confident that he was clean when he came into the ring. I was satisfied."
Brock said he noticed a difference in McCline's physique when he got into the ring with him.
"I had sparred with him before he fought Chris Byrd in the fight before mine because he needed a lefthander and this guy was just ripped up. He was all muscle," Brock said. "When he got into the ring with me for our fight, he was soft and flabby. He was still big, but he wasn't rock hard like he had been when we sparred."
Brock won a 10-round unanimous decision.
Byrd, a close friend of McCline's, said he, too, noticed some differences in McCline when he fought him.
"I just remember at the press conference he was in a rage, screaming about this fight not having anything to do with friendship," Byrd said. "I was like, 'Just calm down.' I couldn't figure out why he was getting all upset."
Byrd also noticed a difference in McCline's physique when he stepped into the ring on fight night.
"His arms were massive," Byrd said. "He was ripped. Everything he hit me with hurt. I've been in with some big punchers, but I've never been punched as hard as he punched me. He was strong. The fight right after mine against Calvin Brock, he didn't look nearly as ripped or as strong. I was thinking, 'This isn't the same guy that fought me.'"
You make a good point. I think fighters are bigger today because of the weight training and diet that they eat. I think if guys from the old school lifted weights and ate the way the guys do now (supplements and such) they'd have been bigger guys too. I do think there are more fighters today that are over 6'4" in the heavyweight division than 30 years ago.J-C wrote:Interesting thread with good points on either side, Robinson certainly seems to know his stuff and Dempseyfire, as always, make some good points.
While on the one hand I would imagine some of the guys form the 60s and 70s would have had a tough time with a big durable guy like Bowe. At the same time having seen how much better Rahman looked at 217lbs (I think) when he fought Holyfield its hard not to think he'd have had a much better career if he's fought sub 220 the whole time.
Question for the training/neutrition experts on here, how big a part do you think the move from 15 from 12 round fights has had on the weights HW choose to come in at? If it was a 15 round fight would Lewis come in at 230 and would Holmes have carried a few extra pounds if he knew it was only a 12 rounder? Just wondering.
Cheers
J-C
Like you peddling your bitter conspiracy theorist nonsense over at cyverboxingzone and getting laughed off the board?granberry wrote:
These so-called "experts" from academia trying to stick their incompetent noses into what is left of "boxing" is a sick joke.
LOL.
Dr. Kyle Pierce is his name. He is at training center on the LSU-S campus. Look him up.granberry wrote:"When I was working on my M.S. in Exercise Science at LSU, we had a professor that is well known for his work with the Olympic weight lifting team and research in exercise science."
US Olympic weightlifting went under decades ago when longtime US Olympic coach Bob Hoffman died and those who used weights congregated around power lifting and bodybuilding.
This "professor" is connected with the totally failed current US Olympic weight lifting team and you expect that to impress?
These so-called "experts" from academia trying to stick their incompetent noses into what is left of "boxing" is a sick joke.
LOL.
A competent BOXING trainer who knows BOXING is needed for a boxer.zslayton wrote:Dr. Kyle Pierce is his name. He is at training center on the LSU-S campus. Look him up.granberry wrote:"When I was working on my M.S. in Exercise Science at LSU, we had a professor that is well known for his work with the Olympic weight lifting team and research in exercise science."
US Olympic weightlifting went under decades ago when longtime US Olympic coach Bob Hoffman died and those who used weights congregated around power lifting and bodybuilding.
This "professor" is connected with the totally failed current US Olympic weight lifting team and you expect that to impress?
These so-called "experts" from academia trying to stick their incompetent noses into what is left of "boxing" is a sick joke.
LOL.
I won't argue about US Olympic Weight Lifting. It hasn't done anything in my lifetime, but science is science. He has also worked with the Bulgarians and a number of other countries where their Olympic teams did well. Olympic lifters don't like powerlifters and powerlifters think Olympic lifters suck. IMO powerlifting is not good for a boxer, but Olympic lifts are useful for developing explosion. However, neither is going to do much for their endurance, which is what I think more fighters need.
He isn't training fighters. He is conditioning them. Conditioning is a science.granberry wrote:A competent BOXING trainer who knows BOXING is needed for a boxer.zslayton wrote:Dr. Kyle Pierce is his name. He is at training center on the LSU-S campus. Look him up.granberry wrote:"When I was working on my M.S. in Exercise Science at LSU, we had a professor that is well known for his work with the Olympic weight lifting team and research in exercise science."
US Olympic weightlifting went under decades ago when longtime US Olympic coach Bob Hoffman died and those who used weights congregated around power lifting and bodybuilding.
This "professor" is connected with the totally failed current US Olympic weight lifting team and you expect that to impress?
These so-called "experts" from academia trying to stick their incompetent noses into what is left of "boxing" is a sick joke.
LOL.
I won't argue about US Olympic Weight Lifting. It hasn't done anything in my lifetime, but science is science. He has also worked with the Bulgarians and a number of other countries where their Olympic teams did well. Olympic lifters don't like powerlifters and powerlifters think Olympic lifters suck. IMO powerlifting is not good for a boxer, but Olympic lifts are useful for developing explosion. However, neither is going to do much for their endurance, which is what I think more fighters need.
That should be obvious.
The academics collect salaries and try to justify their own existence with their total crap.
They know NOTHING about boxing.
He isn't training fighters. He is conditioning them. Conditioning is a science.[/quote]zslayton wrote:A competent BOXING trainer who knows BOXING is needed for a boxer.granberry wrote:Dr. Kyle Pierce is his name. He is at training center on the LSU-S campus. Look him up.zslayton wrote:
US Olympic weightlifting went under decades ago when longtime US Olympic coach Bob Hoffman died and those who used weights congregated around power lifting and bodybuilding.
This "professor" is connected with the totally failed current US Olympic weight lifting team and you expect that to impress?
These so-called "experts" from academia trying to stick their incompetent noses into what is left of "boxing" is a sick joke.
LOL.
I won't argue about US Olympic Weight Lifting. It hasn't done anything in my lifetime, but science is science. He has also worked with the Bulgarians and a number of other countries where their Olympic teams did well. Olympic lifters don't like powerlifters and powerlifters think Olympic lifters suck. IMO powerlifting is not good for a boxer, but Olympic lifts are useful for developing explosion. However, neither is going to do much for their endurance, which is what I think more fighters need.
That should be obvious.
The academics collect salaries and try to justify their own existence with their total crap.
They know NOTHING about boxing.
Yes you’re right. For years I’ve been miffed at the discussion of Holfyfields “great conditioning”, because in general as a HW Holyfield was seldom able to keep up much of a pace, and he probably had very few fights where he averaged even 45 punches per round. I guess relative to much of his opposition his conditioning has been good, but compared to earlier breed HW fighters, it was ordinary at best.dempseyfire wrote:I've seen that article. Yes, the same Holyfield who teetered out late vs both Moorer and Bowe in the rematch and often became a sitting duck for Foreman's punches in their fight.
The best Holyfield stamina wise was vs Qawi when he weighed 190. Holyfield always had stamina issues at Heavyweight.
At least the teens, if not earlier.dempseyfire wrote:Doing plyometric-type exercises and other drills for 3 minute durations (a round) with a minute rest in beween has been apart of training since the teens.