BoxRec

Is it officially the most succesful division the UK has had in terms of World title holders.

In the last 20 years or so we have had Eubank, Benn, Catley, Reid, Calzaghe, Froch and also Murray Sutherland in the 80s. Is this officially the best division the UK has had?

What do people think the reason for this is? Is it as simple as the average height of a UK man being about the right height of a good super Middleweight or is there a deeper reason people can think of?

You forgot Richie Woodhall!!

There's also potential in Groves and Degale to join these guys.

I think it is due to the average size of a man in the UK. I do not consider myself tall or short, thin or fat, so I am pretty much your average bloke, and if I was to fight, I think SMW would be my limit.

Much like far east countries produce a lot of lighter weight fighters.

its probably something to do with the national height, build.

south american and far eastern countries dominate the lighter weights, the heavyweights will be where there is emphasis placed on heavy physique training like states and eastern europe as you also see those countries dominate olympic field sports like hammer, javelin etc and weighlifting.

milpool wrote:You forgot Richie Woodhall!!

Yeah with that many World champs I knew I'd forgotten someone.

I think Warren's association with the WBO helped - cause ontop of the World champions you could add a few other world title challengers - some of whom didn't really deserve a shot if being honest but it added to the feel of it.

The likes of Carr, Neville Brown, Stretch, Storey, Close, Starie, etc etc.

If being truthful, some of these were almost of the equivalent of Burns vs Cook - and it certainly elevated Eubank (especially) and Benn's standing.

I've always thought about this. Looking through the boxers' records they range from about 5'9" to 6'1". I suppose that's the average range of size for a man in the UK. I'm guessing the average size for a bloke here is 5'10, 5'11.

It changes as successive generations get taller.

I think it's 5'8" to 5'9" as it stands currently, the average. Slightly taller in places like Holland and Scandinavia and the US, I think (but I imagine their stats exclude those living there that make up a hefty % of the population but who were not born in the US i.e. South Americans and Mexicans, who are historically smaller).

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:I've always thought about this. Looking through the boxers' records they range from about 5'9" to 6'1". I suppose that's the average range of size for a man in the UK. I'm guessing the average size for a bloke here is 5'10, 5'11.

Don't hold me to this but I think the average height here is 5'8.

I think it was, but a while ago. I'm 5'8.5" (and the .5 is IMPORTANT MAN!!) and I'm not the shortest bloke I know by a long stretch (a lot of shortass liars claim 5'8" when I can see I'm a couple of inches taller than them- I think 5'8" is the last acceptable height to be before you have to officially admit to yourself and others that you are "short") but, even though I wish I was Mr Average, I know most of my mates are taller than me.

Wikipedia says the average height for a male aged 25-34 in England and Scotland is 5'10"

There you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height

I am officially a dwarf.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

The Dark Destroyer wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:I've always thought about this. Looking through the boxers' records they range from about 5'9" to 6'1". I suppose that's the average range of size for a man in the UK. I'm guessing the average size for a bloke here is 5'10, 5'11.

Don't hold me to this but I think the average height here is 5'8.

I think it was, but a while ago. I'm 5'8.5" (and the .5 is IMPORTANT MAN!!) and I'm not the shortest bloke I know by a long stretch (a lot of shortass liars claim 5'8" when I can see I'm a couple of inches taller than them- I think 5'8" is the last acceptable height to be before you have to officially admit to yourself and others that you are "short") but, even though I wish I was Mr Average, I know most of my mates are taller than me.

Wikipedia says the average height for a male aged 25-34 in England and Scotland is 5'10"

There you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height

I am officially a dwarf.

oompa lumpa

Successive generations from now aren't going to get any taller; the main reason for our increase in height over the last 200 years has simply been better nutrition (specifically, more ready-available protein) and less child labour (thereby leaving more energy to devote to the calorie-hungry process of growing). Any increase in food intake over what we eat in 2012 isn't going to translate into vertical growth (although, looking around, it means plenty more horizontal growth).

stujones wrote:I think Warren's association with the WBO helped - cause ontop of the World champions you could add a few other world title challengers - some of whom didn't really deserve a shot if being honest but it added to the feel of it.

The likes of Carr, Neville Brown, Stretch, Storey, Close, Starie, etc etc.

If being truthful, some of these were almost of the equivalent of Burns vs Cook - and it certainly elevated Eubank (especially) and Benn's standing.

I always rated starie, loved his style.

It's a fairly new weight division. I notice certain top US fighters have seemingly by passed it over the years for the more "traditional" weight divisions.

Imagine if Roy Jones decided it was the weight division for him. You could strike those British names in his era from the list of world title holders for a start!

By passed was the wrong term. Their respective stays weren't long at the weight though for whatever reasons.