Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make 175
prime vs. prime
both are of the same age , debuted in the same year and Griffin even started at a higher weight.
spoiler vs counterpuncher , a superb classic stylistic match .
How did this never happen ? even in 2008-2010 , but even prior to.
4 those who insist on Byrd being unable 2 comfortably make 175 , while u r wrong , consider it a 185 lbs catchweight (each man can come as low as he wishes as long as it's not above 185)
Byrd turned pro @ 169 @ age 23 (almost) and weighed in as low as 171 later that year while even closer 2 age 23 . Then he weighed in as low as 174 @ 2008 @ age of almost 38 . if u think he couldn't make 175 comfortably @ any point in his career , especially given d 24 (?) hours weigh in then u r wrong . But if it makes u feel better , consider it a 180 lbs catchweight between d 2 .
Also , Griffin's weight while @ d same age (around 23) @ d same time (1993) varied from a 173 lowest up 2 a 183.75 highest and reached d round 190 as soon as 1994 , about 2 months b4 Griffin turned 24 . Griffin also weighed in above d 175 limit whenever there was no title @ stake . Griffin was quite a fully fledged 175 , Byrd n overstuffed 175 (if not 168) . In terms of weight these men r closer 2 each other than most believe . Griffin represented d USA @ 1992 @ 178 , Byrd represented d USA @ 1992 @ 165 . Griffin only 2 months older than Byrd and it makes little difference @ age 22 . Not 2 mention i just showed that their natural and unnatural weights remained similar until d age of 24 and @ post age 35 (Griffin weighed in as high as 188 @ age 40 vs Ross Thompson only 2 drop 10 lbs d year later 4 his last fight)
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Byrd would have battered him IMO.
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rjj tszyu
Byrd would have battered him IMO.
(do u know that) 1 way 2 look @ it is d man who got stopped by Calzaghe (by KO?) (and lost 2 Tszyu ?) against d man who outpointed John Ruiz and went 2:2 against Jeremy Williams , winning d last 2 .
A bit later it was d man who got a gift decision over Arthur Williams against d man who probably got robbed against Eric Harding and handed Roy Jones his 1st loss and at least on paper handed James Toney 2 more losses . Toney was at n infinitely better shape against Griffin than he was against Jones .
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Stylistically it sounds good but I believe realistically it never could have happened at 175. Byrd was always going to be a smallish heavyweight and once he found success vs Vitali, Holyfield, Tua etc there was no going back. His body wouldn't tolerate it not his bank account. By the time he tried near the end of career t was out of more desperation and he was shot to bits in one of the saddest fights I've ever seen. In a "p4p" hypothetical scenario if they did go I'd have to go with Byrd. Just a sharper, busier guy who could vary backfoot and inside combos very well. Griffin was shifty awkward bu don't think he keeps up with Byrd. He was fortunate to spoil with Toney and I don't think he handed Roy a defeat so much as Roy handed it in a way to himself.
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Stylistically it sounds good but I believe realistically it never could have happened at 175. Byrd was always going to be a smallish heavyweight and once he found success vs Vitali, Holyfield, Tua etc there was no going back. His body wouldn't tolerate it not his bank account. By the time he tried near the end of career t was out of more desperation and he was shot to bits in one of the saddest fights I've ever seen. In a "p4p" hypothetical scenario if they did go I'd have to go with Byrd. Just a sharper, busier guy who could vary backfoot and inside combos very well. Griffin was shifty awkward bu don't think he keeps up with Byrd. He was fortunate to spoil with Toney and I don't think he handed Roy a defeat so much as Roy handed it in a way to himself.
i edited it 4u and your likes , here is d added edited part brought here 4 your convenience . Hope it helps u concentrate more on d stylistic / technical part or understand Y it was even legit @ d original posted weight of 175 :
4 those who insist on Byrd being unable 2 comfortably make 175 , while u r wrong , consider it a 185 lbs catchweight (each man can come as low as he wishes as long as it's not above 185)
Byrd turned pro @ 169 @ age 23 (almost) and weighed in as low as 171 later that year while even closer 2 age 23 . Then he weighed in as low as 174 @ 2008 @ age of almost 38 . if u think he couldn't make 175 comfortably @ any point in his career , especially given d 24 (?) hours weigh in then u r wrong . But if it makes u feel better , consider it a 180 lbs catchweight between d 2 .
Also , Griffin's weight while @ d same age (around 23) @ d same time (1993) varied from a 173 lowest up 2 a 183.75 highest and reached d round 190 as soon as 1994 , about 2 months b4 Griffin turned 24 . Griffin also weighed in above d 175 limit whenever there was no title @ stake . Griffin was quite a fully fledged 175 , Byrd n overstuffed 175 (if not 16 . In terms of weight these men r closer 2 each other than most believe . Griffin represented d USA @ 1992 @ 178 , Byrd represented d USA @ 1992 @ 165 . Griffin only 2 months older than Byrd and it makes little difference @ age 22 . Not 2 mention i just showed that their natural and unnatural weights remained similar until d age of 24 and @ post age 35 (Griffin weighed in as high as 188 @ age 40 vs Ross Thompson only 2 drop 10 lbs d year later 4 his last fight)
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Chris Byrd is a great Xample of a little man fighting monsters way above d weight he belonged @ and was not bad @ it . His style is a smart style 4 a man of his size @ d division where he fought @ . C how much appreciation Pernell Whitaker gets 4 not winning vs Jose Luis Ramirez , most consider it a robbery and in his case it was not "now i m here , now i m not" , it was now i m not here later i still won't b" .
Pernell Whitaker turned a scheduled fight in2 a disgrace of a mismatch/no contest without having d Xcuse of being undersized . Byrd fought how a smaller man should fight .
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Quote:
Originally Posted by
frankenfrank
Chris Byrd is a great Xample of a little man fighting monsters way above d weight he belonged @ and was not bad @ it . His style is a smart style 4 a man of his size @ d division where he fought @ . C how much appreciation Pernell Whitaker gets 4 not winning vs Jose Luis Ramirez , most consider it a robbery and in his case it was not "now i m here , now i m not" , it was now i m not here later i still won't b" .
Pernell Whitaker turned a scheduled fight in2 a disgrace of a mismatch/no contest without having d Xcuse of being undersized . Byrd fought how a smaller man should fight .
What the hell are you talking about 'above where he belonged'? You know where he belonged and he didn't?? He was a 2x HW champion so how did he not belong?
Chris byrd is naturally much bigger than i.e joe frazier and the same size as holyfield so how is he small? Difference is holy has to pack on muscle to weigh what byrd naturally weighs....
The ignorance on the subject of Chris Byrd and the idea that he is a "blown up middleweight" simply amazes me.
Chris Byrd turned pro in January '93 at a weight of about 169 pounds. By his third fight Byrd was fighting at above 205 pounds. In only his ninth fight and his seventh at heavyweight, Byrd defeated 6'6 Mike Rouse for the Vacant USBA Heavyweight Title. Chris Byrd has fought 47 times in his professional career, 44 of those fights have been at heavyweight. Byrd has weighed well over 205 pounds for each of those fights, and if that doesn't make him a heavyweight, then I don't know what would. He weighed 215 for holy and tua....
I am sure that the Byrd watchers will say that Byrd fought at Middleweight as an amateur, but I have to say that many a heavyweight fought at the lower weights as an amateur. Professional ranks is a whole new story. Ali, Tony Tucker, Michael Moorer, Evander Holyfield, these are just a very few of the many heavyweight champions who fought at lower weights as amateurs. In Michael Moorers case he fought at Jr. Middleweight.
The pressure of making the 165 pound limit may have cost Byrd a gold medal, this is a subject that no one cares to talk about but the truth is Byrd's weight hovered around 180 when not training in early '92. These are Byrds own words. Again I point out if Byrd is a blown up middleweight then why in '92 was he struggling to make the 165 pound weight limit for the Olympic Games?
Who started the myth about Byrd being a blown up middleweight? I don't know. It could have been any number of writers or was it Byrd himself? Was the reason to gain a mental edge over other fighters? Was it to get the big fights? Only Byrd knows that. Byrd is a heavyweight version of Pernell Whitaker. Both at elusive, defensive and very hard to hit. These aspects of his game make him a very boring fighter to watch.
Chris Byrd makes all fighters look bad. Even in his first defeat against Ibeabuchi, Ike did not look like a killing machine. Byrds plan of making Ibeabuchi miss him with his back to the ropes and then countering was working. The fight was dead even going into the fifth. Judges scores after the fourth round were: 38-38, 39-37 for Ibeabuchi, and 39-37 for Byrd. A left hook-uppercut by Ibeabuchi that Byrd never saw coming ended the fight. Byrd has admitted that he learned a lesson from that fight, "Stay the hell off of the ropes".
Byrd has gained a lot of attention for his fights with the Klitschko brothers. I personally feel that this is the reason people like to reiterate the "Byrd Myth" (he is a blown up middleweight that is fighting giants). The truth is that Byrd is a heavyweight fighting bigger heavyweights.
He is far from the "Blown up middleweight Myth" that everyone likes to repeat. Chris Byrds own history will tell you that he has spent 95% of his career as a heavyweight.
Chis Byrd enjoys the idea of being a blown up middleweight, so much so that he repeats the Myth himself. I am sure that he knows the truth and I hope now many of you do as well.
In fact he was so desperate towards his career end that he tried cutting to 175lbs in way too short a time, looked desperately ill in doing so and performed horrendously.
P.s he would have humiliated griffin.
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Quote:
Originally Posted by
frankenfrank
Chris Byrd is a great Xample of a little man fighting monsters way above d weight he belonged @ and was not bad @ it . His style is a smart style 4 a man of his size @ d division where he fought @ . C how much appreciation Pernell Whitaker gets 4 not winning vs Jose Luis Ramirez , most consider it a robbery and in his case it was not "now i m here , now i m not" , it was now i m not here later i still won't b" .
Pernell Whitaker turned a scheduled fight in2 a disgrace of a mismatch/no contest without having d Xcuse of being undersized . Byrd fought how a smaller man should fight .
What the hell are you talking about 'above where he belonged'? You know where he belonged and he didn't?? He was a 2x HW champion so how did he not belong?
Chris byrd is naturally much bigger than i.e joe frazier and the same size as holyfield so how is he small? Difference is holy has to pack on muscle to weigh what byrd naturally weighs....
Your post is full of shit . And then it's loaded with ignorance as well .
Joe Frazier @ age 21 , represented d US @ HW which was either 190 lbs or 200lbs (or was it unlimited ?) . Chris Byrd @ age 22 , represented d USA @ 165 lbs . Just d same size , weren't they ?
Now u compare him with d 2.5 inches taller Holyfield , whom represented d USA @ d same age of 22 @ 178 lbs .
Holyfield's weight contained more muscle than Byrd's "heavyweight" weight that contained more fat & water .
Byrd forced himself 2 eat & take them roids just so he could weigh like a smaller heavy .
Holyfield worked his ass out , took n industrial amount of juice & HGH and then was both taller and naturally more massive 2 begin with but d true part is that he 2 did not naturally belong @ over 200 lbs . But then again , that is despite him being clearly bigger than Byrd .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
The ignorance on the subject of Chris Byrd and the idea that he is a "blown up middleweight" simply amazes me.
Chris Byrd turned pro in January '93 at a weight of about 169 pounds. By his third fight Byrd was fighting at above 205 pounds.
By his 3rd fight Byrd fought @ 193 lbs , wonder where u took your above 205 lbs stat .
Also , he didn't dehydrate , starve nor cut weight in order 2 make that weight , on d contrary , he overate , took d juice and trained hard just 2 weigh in like some lightheavies do when inside d ring or @ home resting between fights .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
In only his ninth fight and his seventh at heavyweight, Byrd defeated 6'6 Mike Rouse for the Vacant USBA Heavyweight Title.
And this is only another little proof of Byrd's level of talent , not any indication of size .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Chris Byrd has fought 47 times in his professional career, 44 of those fights have been at heavyweight. Byrd has weighed well over 205 pounds for each of those fights, and if that doesn't make him a heavyweight, then I don't know what would.
wrong again : Byrd's 1st 2 fight and last 2 fights were below d heavyweight limit of their own time , as opposed 2d 3 stated in your post .
If going by our time's heavyweight limit then 6 of his fights were @ cruiserweight limit or yet even below . 3 of his fights were inside d lightheavyweight limit . He never had any difficulty making d CW limit . His biggest difficulty was maintaining his very unnatural weight above it .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
He weighed 215 for holy and tua....
Which contained lots of water , generous amounts of fat and then yet even more generous amounts of glycogen , just unlike most of his era's lightheavyweights whom were at least as big as he was .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
I am sure that the Byrd watchers will say that Byrd fought at Middleweight as an amateur, but I have to say that many a heavyweight fought at the lower weights as an amateur. Professional ranks is a whole new story. Ali, Tony Tucker, Michael Moorer, Evander Holyfield, these are just a very few of the many heavyweight champions who fought at lower weights as amateurs. In Michael Moorers case he fought at Jr. Middleweight.
Moorer somehow managed 2 get squeezed in2 156 lbs , until d age of 19 , but in his debut weighed in @ 172 , as opposed 2 Byrd's 169 . Moorer was also slightly taller than Byrd and overall a bigger man even if not by much . I'd place Moorer between Byrd and Holyfield in terms of natural size as a fully grown man , and as stated b4 , even Holyfield , d biggest of these 3 did not belong naturally at over 200 lbs . I read that during Moorer's pro career he had very hard difficulties making d 175 lbs limit , even if not during his 1st year as a pro .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
The pressure of making the 165 pound limit may have cost Byrd a gold medal, this is a subject that no one cares to talk about but the truth is Byrd's weight hovered around 180 when not training in early '92. These are Byrds own words. Again I point out if Byrd is a blown up middleweight then why in '92 was he struggling to make the 165 pound weight limit for the Olympic Games?
Who started the myth about Byrd being a blown up middleweight? I don't know. It could have been any number of writers or was it Byrd himself?
going by Byrd's own words , 4 what it worth , in d last interview with him that i read he claimed that he was a natural supermiddleweight , as opposed 2 natural middleweight which is what u keep repeating in your post .
Supposing that he Xaggerrates , and going by my words , he is a natural lightheavyweight , so keep it there because i never stated nor implied in this thread that he was a natural middleweight .
This thread is about a professional fight @ 175 lbs , again , as opposed 2 middleweight , and if my Xplanations so far r above your comprehension , think that u r referring 2 a 185 lbs catchweight , stop shitting about middleweight because d only posts in which that division is mentioned r your posts .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Was the reason to gain a mental edge over other fighters? Was it to get the big fights? Only Byrd knows that. Byrd is a heavyweight version of Pernell Whitaker. Both at elusive, defensive and very hard to hit. These aspects of his game make him a very boring fighter to watch.
This is d 1st part of your post that is nearly true . However , Byrd was still more aggressive than Whitaker , Xcept from rare occasions , and d size disparities that he faced were much more Xtreme than s 1s Whitaker Xperienced , so I respect Byrd more .
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Chris Byrd makes all fighters look bad. Even in his first defeat against Ibeabuchi, Ike did not look like a killing machine. Byrds plan of making Ibeabuchi miss him with his back to the ropes and then countering was working. The fight was dead even going into the fifth. Judges scores after the fourth round were: 38-38, 39-37 for Ibeabuchi, and 39-37 for Byrd. A left hook-uppercut by Ibeabuchi that Byrd never saw coming ended the fight. Byrd has admitted that he learned a lesson from that fight, "Stay the hell off of the ropes".
Byrd has gained a lot of attention for his fights with the Klitschko brothers. I personally feel that this is the reason people like to reiterate the "Byrd Myth" (he is a blown up middleweight that is fighting giants). The truth is that Byrd is a heavyweight fighting bigger heavyweights.
He is far from the "Blown up middleweight Myth" that everyone likes to repeat. Chris Byrds own history will tell you that he has spent 95% of his career as a heavyweight.
Chis Byrd enjoys the idea of being a blown up middleweight, so much so that he repeats the Myth himself. I am sure that he knows the truth and I hope now many of you do as well.
In fact he was so desperate towards his career end that he tried cutting to 175lbs in way too short a time, looked desperately ill in doing so and performed horrendously.
P.s he would have humiliated griffin.
Again u repeat your blatantly wrong stats which every1 with some degree of functioning brain can go through boxrec with a calculator and c how wrong your post is but i already Xplained it b4 .
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Re: Chris Byrd vs. Montell Griffin , both prime at 175, Byrd could always easily make
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
on paper Byrd is 6" and Griffin's 5'7" . If u want 2 pick Byrd over Griffin because of it is your decision . Griffin lost 2 Tarver , but most probably deserved 2 win vs Harding . Both Tarver and Harding r left handed , like Byrd was , and while I think that Byrd was a greater fighter than Harding in a p4p sense , i remember that Harding beat Tarver and did not bad vs Dawson either .
Griffin also outpointed James Toney twice and won against RJJ .
I M not obsessed with size , i m just aware of it . If I was obsessed with size , i wouldn't have posted this thread , because 5 inches difference would have been enough 4 me 2 conclude d winner , but this is what u did here , not I .
I even did not pick a winner yet (hadn't voted) because IDK how this fight would have been like .
