Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Larry Holmes - One of my favourites, would still be a huge factor. Must be pointed out though that his younger streak featured still some weak opponents and the more decent ones like Witherspoon he had severe problems with. He lost to Spinks, that's bad. His best win was as an oldie against Mercer! And Muhammad was shot.
George Foreman - Older version would do better than younger one! Would still be a huge factor because of chin and power and strength.
Muhammad Ali - Would be a factor but only a B-level boxer at HW. Could have got in shape and been a CW champion and served as a sparring partner for genuine HW's
Ken Norton - Would suffer many KO's. Good enough skill but no power and no chin.
Joe Frazier - Would be annihilated, would not even be able to compete
Sonny Liston - Just an oaf. Would not be seriously competitive with the top 20
Floyd Patterson - Would never make it out of the amatuers
Rocky Marciano - Not a HW
Joe Walcott - Would get pulverised
Ezzaard Charles - Not a HW
Joe Louis - Might be able to be a factor at CW but annihilated at HW.
Primo Carnera - would be clowned
Jack Dempsey - Annihilated
and so on...
This is not against Klitschko, this is career performance against a standard run of opponents in the modern era please note! :)
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
When an old Light heavyweight can beat you up you are going to lose to most if not all those names you mentioned.
So if Arreola is good enough to contend a title, so are all the names you mentioned.
Id also take msot of those names over Stiverne and Arreola.
You are under some illusion that size is everything. Most of those names stood out one way or another skill wise. Todays do not, bar size.
Also, what are the standard for heavies these days? Wlads last bunch of opponents, his most dangerous was knocked out by an old cruiser! Then he defended his title against Mormeck! Pianetta? Wach? Pfffff!:-X
If size was everything Alvarez wouldn't have been made to look like he was standing still against Mayweather.
Spinks wouldn't have beaten Holmes.
;D
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
the klitchkos have completely flatterned the HW division over the last several years with their boring styles and cheating money driven tactics
that makes this HW era the most insignificant of all time
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Please point to the guys on the list I have been harsh on with "skills" in deep advance of a modern boxer?
It's difficult because many of them weren't actually renowned for them were they!! :) But I'll take the liberty of selecting Walcott. He has been termed, the "defensive" one of the bunch.
Let me tell you, he was good but Chris Byrd, he wasn't, and Byrd would have been BIG compared to him as well!
Now I'm not arguing with size altogether, that is 1/3 of my angle. I am saying that the total package that all those fighters represented combining size, athleticism and skill was less that what is required by the modern division.
How could it be otherwise?
What about say, Sultan Ibragimov? Could you really see Sultan being seriously challenged by Sonny Liston? I seen that guy weave into a fucking giant wall of muscle and chop him down like he was nothing! Yet slo-mo Liston is somehow magically gonna catch him with one of his mail order shots!
Chris Arreola! HA! Imagine a guy the size of George Foreman but 20lbs heftier and with good stamina, faster, punching in combination and with real skills and an even better chin, THAT'S Arreola! And how do you suppose Mr. Muhammad would "rope a dope" this man??
I tell you how, he'd jump through the ropes and fuckin run for the friggin hills mate and forget all about ever taking up boxing as a profession.
And please I hate to bring it up, but when Arreola was beaten by Adamek, Adamek WAS a HW. He was in fact the same size as the HEAVY 70's version of Ali (the guy I give credit to a bit). Adamek was also a 7 time world champion boxer! before moving up to HW and he did not do it in Ali style by flipping around the place avoiding a fight, he did it by effective counter-punching.
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Please point to the guys on the list I have been harsh on with "skills" in deep advance of a modern boxer?
It's difficult because many of them weren't actually renowned for them were they!! :) But I'll take the liberty of selecting Walcott. He has been termed, the "defensive" one of the bunch.
Let me tell you, he was good but Chris Byrd, he wasn't, and Byrd would have been BIG compared to him as well!
Now I'm not arguing with size altogether, that is 1/3 of my angle. I am saying that the total package that all those fighters represented combining size, athleticism and skill was less that what is required by the modern division.
How could it be otherwise?
What about say, Sultan Ibragimov? Could you really see Sultan being seriously challenged by Sonny Liston? I seen that guy weave into a fucking giant wall of muscle and chop him down like he was nothing! Yet slo-mo Liston is somehow magically gonna catch him with one of his mail order shots!
Chris Arreola! HA! Imagine a guy the size of George Foreman but 20lbs heftier and with good stamina, faster, punching in combination and with real skills and an even better chin, THAT'S Arreola! And how do you suppose Mr. Muhammad would "rope a dope" this man??
I tell you how, he'd jump through the ropes and fuckin run for the friggin hills mate and forget all about ever taking up boxing as a profession.
And please I hate to bring it up, but when Arreola was beaten by Adamek, Adamek WAS a HW. He was in fact the same size as the HEAVY 70's version of Ali (the guy I give credit to a bit). Adamek was also a 7 time world champion boxer! before moving up to HW and he did not do it in Ali style by flipping around the place avoiding a fight, he did it by effective counter-punching.
You utter twat cunt!
Arreola is better than Foreman?
Foreman would batter Adamek and Stiverne!
Adamek did indeed move up from light heavy yes.
So could all those other better skilled heavies.
Your argument is utterly fucking pointless.
If we could transport all those fighters to here and now in their primes and give them a year with our training and "suppliments" that allow fighters to move up in weight and still look like body builders then todays division would look like what it is. A pile of shit.
Right now the Foreman that wiped out Norton and Frazier would scare the living shit out of Wlad!
If the young Foreman was transported now and put in with Arreola, he'd love to face him as he's so fucking easy to hit. If Adamek, an ex light heavy can hurt Arreola, Foreman will wipe him out!
Joey Abell made Arreola's legs go before he got stopped himself.
Rather than worry aout me becoming a boxer, maybe you should try watching some;)
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Let's have some other facts.. Adamek never HURT Arreola, he just beat him in a boxing match.
Foreman however was STOPPED by former CW Muhammad Ali.
Foreman was STOPPED by former CW Jimmy Young.
Foreman was floored multiple times by Lyle who whilst a hard hitter for the day, was no Arreola!
Foreman was slow and could barely even box! Conversely Arreola is a good boxer and pretty fast!
And the workrate! Ha. Arreola can punch all night at afast pace, Foreman gasses after a few rounds and wings shots out of the field. Those tactics are fine when your oppoennts are tomato cans like Fraxier, Roman and Norton, but any form of durable opponent, something more is required.
When he met Holyfield and Morrison, SUDDENLY he wasn't quite the thrashing machine!
I mean can you really see Jimmy Young in with Chris Arreola?? KO1 is my prediction!! :)
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Let's have some other facts.. Adamek never HURT Arreola, he just beat him in a boxing match.
Foreman however was STOPPED by former CW Muhammad Ali.
Foreman was STOPPED by former CW Jimmy Young.
Foreman was floored multiple times by Lyle who whilst a hard hitter for the day, was no Arreola!
Foreman was slow and could barely even box! Conversely Arreola is a good boxer and pretty fast!
And the workrate! Ha. Arreola can punch all night at afast pace, Foreman gasses after a few rounds and wings shots out of the field. Those tactics are fine when your oppoennts are tomato cans like Fraxier, Roman and Norton, but any form of durable opponent, something more is required.
When he met Holyfield and Morrison, SUDDENLY he wasn't quite the thrashing machine!
I mean can you really see Jimmy Young in with Chris Arreola?? KO1 is my prediction!! :)
Can you really see a light heavyweight that Chad Dawson beat in with Chris Arreola?;D
Twat...:rolleyes:
Foreman was a fucking old man by then but like you've pointed out, he was still capable of giving a heavyweight great in his prime a long tough fight.
Frazier is a tomato can?
He fought and smashed one of the greatest light heavies ever.
Arreola couldn't smash, he lost and it wasn't to one of the greatest light heavies either.
Moron.
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Oh and Wlads most dangerous opponent according to El Kabbong was a cruiser weight.
Im now thinking I look stupid for arguing with you because this is clearly a wind up?
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
So Chad Dawson once beat someone that moved up in weight to beat Arreola, whoopty doo! So that settles it huh! I guess that makes Foreman less than Leon Spinks then right because he beat Muhammad who beat him. It just doesn't work like that.
I'm not insisting that Foreman is less than Arreola. In actual fact I think it'd be a good fight. But I do know one thing, watching prime Foreman vs Lyle, seeing how shit he was there and how devastating I've seen Chris Arreola it's hard for me to envision anthing but an Arreola KO victory over big George. That's where my money'd be going anyway!!
Adamek was a really skilled boxer, believe it or not! He had not size or speed in excess but he made up for it in quality!
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ross
Oh and Wlads most dangerous opponent according to El Kabbong was a cruiser weight.
Im now thinking I look stupid for arguing with you because this is clearly a wind up?
Correction.. FORMER CW. And I also would judge Haye as being one of Wlad's more dangerous opponents, but I don't consider that such a bad thing either, he was a good boxer.
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
So Chad Dawson once beat someone that moved up in weight to beat Arreola, whoopty doo! So that settles it huh! I guess that makes Foreman less than Leon Spinks then right because he beat Muhammad who beat him. It just doesn't work like that.
I'm not insisting that Foreman is less than Arreola. In actual fact I think it'd be a good fight. But I do know one thing, watching prime Foreman vs Lyle, seeing how shit he was there and how devastating I've seen Chris Arreola it's hard for me to envision anthing but an Arreola KO victory over big George. That's where my money'd be going anyway!!
Adamek was a really skilled boxer, believe it or not! He had not size or speed in excess but he made up for it in quality!
Arreola couldn't knock out Stiverne who doesn't have the greatest chin and isn't hard to hit.
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
We all know what happened there, I think he would have smashed Stiverne the 1st time, he was beating him to start but his big nose got in the way. Bit hard to fight with a busted nose, it hurts and you cant see. But he troopered on and finished the entire fight! That's awesome!
I think we'll see the real ending coming up shortly ;)
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
Now i think max power makes some good points about modern heavyweights, the sheer size of guys these days has changed things quite a lot, and it is very possible that they do hit harder then ever , just going by size, but obviously there are a lot of other things to consider too.... I like the heavyweight division and dont think it is anywhere near as bad as it is made out to be but size isnt everything .. Wehn haye came up to heavyweight he had some good results and could ko heavy guys like chisora fairly easily and he only weight 210-220 pounds he willingly came in lower than his usual heavyweight weight to face wlad and didnt come close to being ko'd, so to say ali who was a similar size to haye would be b level because of his size is juts wrong I think.
Re: Historical HW's in the modern era for Brockton to dispute
That's true @palmerq, size isn't everything but I'm not basing it on size alone.
There were 2 versions of Ali. The 60's version fought by being fast on his feet and fast with his hands. He also had exceptional stamina so he could run all night and dart in to score and be out of range avoiding getting hit. But this was all heavily dependent on the fact that that Ali out-talled nearly all his opponents. He also outweighed nearly all of them too. You'll struggle to find an opponent in that time where he did not either outsize in some way. His success was dependent on his range as well as his speed. Later 70's Ali was heavier and stronger but his success depended on taking a lot of punches.
Conversely, Haye's range is more or less hum-drum today, and in fact the guys he fought at HW most all out-talled him and all out-weighed him! Completely different situation. Haye had to depend on real boxing skills, not having the luxury of a size advantage!
When Ali slowed down it showed the truth, Ali's reflexes absolutely sucked! He depended on running around out of range to be successful! He didn't have the reflexes or the upper body movement to avoid punishment.
Haye however fights on the edge, he has some of the best reflexes at HW ever seen and excellent head and upperbody movemet. He does not regularly get hit at all!
Taking punches like Ali did might have been ok in a featherfisted era like the 60's and 70's but I think you'd agree that today that would not be an advisable strategy! At the power of the modern division one would definitely need to avoid getting hit! Chins can only be so hard! The heftier the opposition, the greater the chances of KO. That's how much HW boxing has changed. The time of the punch bags is over!
And finally, Haye has real power at HW, Ali could not crack an egg compared to Haye.
And so that's why I give credit to Haye and not so much Ali. Ali's style would be good in the amatuers today but as a professional he would find things pretty rough, atleast in the HW division.
I mean if you actually analyse his career he struggled badly against some pretty poor quality opponents, Frazier, Norton, Spinks, Young. I don't think any of these guys would play any serious factor today. And how about getting decked by 185lb Cooper, do you really think Cooper would pose a punch threat to a modern HW? Doubt it.
