Boxers who you think would NOT have been so great if not for their size

[AdamGB]

We're not quite at the point where it's needed yet.

Most Smaller heavies could get down to cruiser - if you're under 225 and you can't drop a few pounds and sweat the rest out then you must be extremely lean (how many heavies look in shape now days?). There's more money and prestige at heavyweight and seeing as how most cruiser walk around well over 200lb, it's easier for them to just not bother cutting weight... It's their choice, so if their effective fighting weight is 200lb but they chose to fight guys 225+ then they can't complain.

The other point is that weight and height don't give you a godlike advantage, look at Valuev, look at Carnera, look at how Tyson made it a disadvantage to be taller than him.

You're telling me that the likes of 219lb Sultan couldn't do 200lb?

I don't think the problem is that heavies are too big, too many guys shouldn't even be in the division, which is why we get all of these mismatches.

[Mr140]

I think brockton is just pissed because Rocky would get his ass kicked into days heavyweight division. I mean ever sense he admitted it he has had some kind of agenda against the big guys in the division. Did Tyson or Holyfeild do so poorly against big guys not really. I mean Holyfeild beat Bowie in the rematch and Took Lewis in rematch to a draw at the very least and he was like fucking 37 years of age. If being big was such a advantage then how come Vitali, Wlad and Lewis are the only champs you can think of who were huge and good at boxing. There are plenty of big guys now yet not one is even close to those guys you know why there not because they are not as skilled in boxing being big can work against you to. I mean you lose speed and in the inside it can be rough for you with long arms but the guys i mention have worked on it because there great heavys.

[greynotsoold]

The single most obvious example in the history of boxing is Tommy Hearns. If he was not 6'2" tall, if he were a 5'8" WW, he'd have gone 16-11 in his career.
That is easy for me to say because I think Hearns is incredibly overrated. This physically hurts me. I do not think Little Red Lopez would have done so well had he not been so tall for his weight.

[AdamGB]

And what is to say that inside fighters with short, stocky frames wouldn't have lost several more fights than they did if you made them a bit longer and a bit ganglier? They'd be weaker and less effective on the inside.

Why pick on tall guys? lol

As I said, any human being with the talent to box will develop a style that suits their frame... Not the other way round...

If their frame was different then they would likely be just as talented but with a different style...

[El Kabong]

Spot on Adam!

If Hearns was shorter he might take a punch better, he might lose pop off his own punch....its impossible to separate natural skill vs skills learned from size.

[greynotsoold]

And what is to say that inside fighters with short, stocky frames wouldn't have lost several more fights than they did if you made them a bit longer and a bit ganglier? They'd be weaker and less effective on the inside.

Why pick on tall guys? lol

As I said, any human being with the talent to box will develop a style that suits their frame... Not the other way round...

If their frame was different then they would likely be just as talented but with a different style...

I think that this is a fair point, and one that addresses some of the success of the giants like the K brothers. They have learned to use their height advantage quite well...but many of their opponents don't know how to use their lack of height at all. Like Tua vs Lewis, thinking that by walking forward (sort of) resolutely, that he would somehow get to where he needed to be. Learn from Joe Frazier and Marciano, get smaller to fight guys that are trying to get bigger.

[El Kabong]

I think that this is a fair point, and one that addresses some of the success of the giants like the K brothers. They have learned to use their height advantage quite well...but many of their opponents don't know how to use their lack of height at all. Like Tua vs Lewis, thinking that by walking forward (sort of) resolutely, that he would somehow get to where he needed to be. Learn from Joe Frazier and Marciano, get smaller to fight guys that are trying to get bigger.

Lennox & The Klitschko's are smart fighters....who is to say if they were shorter or stockier they wouldn't continue to be just as smart and fight using their smaller height & lighter weight?


Point being they are/were successful due to their brains as well as their size.

[Fenster]

Regardless of the spin argument - "what if they were smaller" - it's obvious size is an advantage. So it's reasonable to question whether or not big men would have been as successful without their advantage.

There are currently 1085 pro heavyweights. Weight limit - 200-300lbs.

There are currently 4138 pro fighters between 147-160 - 13lbs difference.

The competition is clearly much more fierce the closer you get to an average sized man.

[greynotsoold]

I think that this is a fair point, and one that addresses some of the success of the giants like the K brothers. They have learned to use their height advantage quite well...but many of their opponents don't know how to use their lack of height at all. Like Tua vs Lewis, thinking that by walking forward (sort of) resolutely, that he would somehow get to where he needed to be. Learn from Joe Frazier and Marciano, get smaller to fight guys that are trying to get bigger.

Lennox & The Klitschko's are smart fighters....who is to say if they were shorter or stockier they wouldn't continue to be just as smart and fight using their smaller height & lighter weight?


Point being they are/were successful due to their brains as well as their size.

Learning to use a height advantage is a skill in and of itself. Mike White was 6'10", played in the NBA; real tall, obviously 'athletic'. Not even a ranked pro during his career.
When you look to the lighter weight classes...Many old time fight guys considered Benny Leonard greater than Ray Robinson because benny was average height for his weight, while Robinson was very tall for his weight.

[IamInuit]

The single most obvious example in the history of boxing is Tommy Hearns. If he was not 6'2" tall, if he were a 5'8" WW, he'd have gone 16-11 in his career.
That is easy for me to say because I think Hearns is incredibly overrated. This physically hurts me. I do not think Little Red Lopez would have done so well had he not been so tall for his weight.

And yet look at Paul Williams. Pretty much the exact same specimen and yet one used his advantages and one did not. Even the one that didn't had reasonable success by skirting around them.

Would Ray have been Ray or Ezzard Ezzard? Would Saddler have beaten Pep 3 times? Imo you cant discount size (meaning more then weight) and you cant over count it either. Jimmy Wilde looked like a scurvy ridden anemic bean sprout and look what he did. Something else makes or contributes to these guys. Something not physical.

[p4pking]

The single most obvious example in the history of boxing is Tommy Hearns. If he was not 6'2" tall, if he were a 5'8" WW, he'd have gone 16-11 in his career.
That is easy for me to say because I think Hearns is incredibly overrated. This physically hurts me. I do not think Little Red Lopez would have done so well had he not been so tall for his weight.

And yet look at Paul Williams. Pretty much the exact same specimen and yet one used his advantages and one did not. Even the one that didn't had reasonable success by skirting around them.

Would Ray have been Ray or Ezzard Ezzard? Would Saddler have beaten Pep 3 times? Imo you cant discount size (meaning more then weight) and you cant over count it either. Jimmy Wilde looked like a scurvy ridden anemic bean sprout and look what he did. Something else makes or contributes to these guys. Something not physical.

Yes. The notion of making Hearns a 5'8 WW... He'd be a completely different human being, what on earth is that supposed to mean? You can't seperate a fighter from their build and play what ifs like that, it's completely assinine. These men spend their lives learning to fight with what natural tools they have. If Hearns had been 5'8 he probably would've been a lot like a Saddler and fought around 130 pounds. No reason whatsoever to think he would've been any less good.

[Memphis]

Yeah this is a not so thinly veiled moan about big lumps because the rock was a midget.

Go make some videos about beer you bastard and stop bitching

[brocktonblockbust]

I think brockton is just pissed because Rocky would get his ass kicked into days heavyweight division. I mean ever sense he admitted it he has had some kind of agenda against the big guys in the division. Did Tyson or Holyfeild do so poorly against big guys not really. I mean Holyfeild beat Bowie in the rematch and Took Lewis in rematch to a draw at the very least and he was like fucking 37 years of age. If being big was such a advantage then how come Vitali, Wlad and Lewis are the only champs you can think of who were huge and good at boxing. There are plenty of big guys now yet not one is even close to those guys you know why there not because they are not as skilled in boxing being big can work against you to. I mean you lose speed and in the inside it can be rough for you with long arms but the guys i mention have worked on it because there great heavys.

point 1---Rocky would not fight somebody 6 foot 7 and 250 pounds. Thats ridiculous. He was 3 weight divisions under that stature. Why would I even consider Rocky fighting Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko or Tyson Fury? Neither I nor Rocky would even consider it.

point 2---I love Foreman he is probably my number 2 alltime favorite. Nothing against big guys.

point 3---they are not the only 3. currently no one seems to be able to beat either Klitschko, nobody soundly ever beat Valuev, nobody can seem to touch Tyson Fury, nobody could get past Lennox's reach except for those 2 freak times lets call them, and how many other boxers actually were there over the past 10 years who were above 6 foot 5 and 250 pounds anyway? Its becasue there weren't very many human beings in boxing who were that size. Its rare for a boxer to be 6 foot 5 and 250 pounds-plus. The ones who are that size seemed to be champions in my opinion.

Could Rocky Marciano ro Joe Frazier or Mike Tyson or Jerry Quarry or Evander Holyfield even REACH THE FUCKING CHIN OF TYSON FURY?

[El Kabong]

Valuev never fought a good heavyweight but when he fought a decent one he got beat FACT! Taras Bidenko stunned him....Taras fucking Bidenko!

Vitali & Wlad offered Valuev shots at their belts and nothing doing, Valuev didn't want anything to do with them because he'd get his super huge yeti skull beaten in!

[p4pking]

I think brockton is just pissed because Rocky would get his ass kicked into days heavyweight division. I mean ever sense he admitted it he has had some kind of agenda against the big guys in the division. Did Tyson or Holyfeild do so poorly against big guys not really. I mean Holyfeild beat Bowie in the rematch and Took Lewis in rematch to a draw at the very least and he was like fucking 37 years of age. If being big was such a advantage then how come Vitali, Wlad and Lewis are the only champs you can think of who were huge and good at boxing. There are plenty of big guys now yet not one is even close to those guys you know why there not because they are not as skilled in boxing being big can work against you to. I mean you lose speed and in the inside it can be rough for you with long arms but the guys i mention have worked on it because there great heavys.

point 1---Rocky would not fight somebody 6 foot 7 and 250 pounds. Thats ridiculous. He was 3 weight divisions under that stature. Why would I even consider Rocky fighting Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko or Tyson Fury? Neither I nor Rocky would even consider it.

point 2---I love Foreman he is probably my number 2 alltime favorite. Nothing against big guys.

point 3---they are not the only 3. currently no one seems to be able to beat either Klitschko, nobody soundly ever beat Valuev, nobody can seem to touch Tyson Fury, nobody could get past Lennox's reach except for those 2 freak times lets call them, and how many other boxers actually were there over the past 10 years who were above 6 foot 5 and 250 pounds anyway? Its becasue there weren't very many human beings in boxing who were that size. Its rare for a boxer to be 6 foot 5 and 250 pounds-plus. The ones who are that size seemed to be champions in my opinion.

Could Rocky Marciano ro Joe Frazier or Mike Tyson or Jerry Quarry or Evander Holyfield even REACH THE FUCKING CHIN OF TYSON FURY?

Uh, yes? They would all clobber him in a few rounds tops. I think it's kind of funny that you include Valuev and Fury in your arguement here. The way they fight is actually quite typical for men of that size, they are slow and clumsy as hell. Lewis and the Klits are dominant because they have the speed and dexterity of smaller men, they don't by any means represent men of their size by and large. It's no different than a lightweight who punches like a welter, that's a natural advantage that is very difficult to overcome if said fighter develops his craft well.