Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    92
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1051
    Cool Clicks

    Default Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Thing that has bugged me lately is the stock phrase when comparing heavys from different eras "modern heavyweights are too big & strong for the older heavyweights"

    You could argue this point if you are talking about someone like Bowe or Lewis perhaps but, for example, recently it was used over over & over again in the imaginery matchup between Holmes & Louis.

    In reality though Holmes was 6 3" & Louis 6 2". Holmes was 15 stone 1 when he fought Ali & Louis 15 stone 2 when he beat Walcott. This size thing is often a bit of a myth.

    You might think Holmes would beat Louis but size is not a factor. Puts a different slant on it I reckon.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    In my own little Universe
    Posts
    9,933
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2187
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Yeah - I totally agree.

    If size really was everything, why weren't Valuev and Carnera in the tournament.

    Dempsey and Louis absolutely butchered Willard and Buddy Baer (who were both at least 6'6"), just as Ali did to the similar sized Ernie Terrell. Tyson handled the Bonecrusher and Tucker with general ease ... though a great deal was made about the fact they actually landed a punch (!)

    Skill, technique, heart, conditioning, talent and toughness will always out against someone who has less than these, even if he is bigger
    .
    If God wanted us to be vegetarians, why are animals made of meat ?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    92
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1051
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    I agree, but the point is often it's just assumed that because a fighter is from the 50's or 40' he must be much smaller but that isn't necessarily true.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,306
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Too just presume old fighters were always smaller just shows ignorance and lack of knowledge.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Caerphilly, Wales
    Posts
    1,772
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1599
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    All great points so far and I'm in total agreement.

    Also some of the Heavyweights from past years had to fight for 45 rounds etc. Now imagine people like Shannon Briggs, Frank Bruno etc trying to last that long they just couldn't do it.
    Which makes a mockery of posters who claim that Heavyweights now are better conditioned, tougher and fitter.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7,495
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2633
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Someone a few years ago came up with the idea the bigger the Better the fighter, unfortunatly they forgot one thing that stops bigger men getting fit its called Gravity.
    Pain lasts a only a minute, but the memory will last forever....

    boxingbournemouth - Cornelius Carrs private boxing tuition and personal fitness training

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,623
    Mentioned
    1667 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3019
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Agree in general but Joe Louis fought at his best under 200lb for superstitious reasons and Rocky was a cruiserweight. Size does matter as my woman always tells me!
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    In my own little Universe
    Posts
    9,933
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    2187
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Quote Originally Posted by Master
    but Joe Louis fought at his best under 200lb for superstitious reasons
    I'm not sure it was superstitious .... I thought that the only time that Joe tried hard to get under 200 was when he didn't want to be perceived as a big bully against Conn?
    If God wanted us to be vegetarians, why are animals made of meat ?

  9. #9
    ICB Guest

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Quote Originally Posted by Googoogachoob
    Thing that has bugged me lately is the stock phrase when comparing heavys from different eras "modern heavyweights are too big & strong for the older heavyweights"

    You could argue this point if you are talking about someone like Bowe or Lewis perhaps but, for example, recently it was used over over & over again in the imaginery matchup between Holmes & Louis.

    In reality though Holmes was 6 3" & Louis 6 2". Holmes was 15 stone 1 when he fought Ali & Louis 15 stone 2 when he beat Walcott. This size thing is often a bit of a myth.

    You might think Holmes would beat Louis but size is not a factor. Puts a different slant on it I reckon.

    Louis was bit out of shape when he fought Walcott Holmes was in his best fighting shape thats big difference.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,623
    Mentioned
    1667 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3019
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    I have read that Joe Louis fought under 200lb and only went over during the latter part of his career when he was not at his peak.
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    4,574
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1435
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Comparing heavyweights from different eras

    Quote Originally Posted by X
    Yeah - I totally agree.

    If size really was everything, why weren't Valuev and Carnera in the tournament.

    Dempsey and Louis absolutely butchered Willard and Buddy Baer (who were both at least 6'6"), just as Ali did to the similar sized Ernie Terrell. Tyson handled the Bonecrusher and Tucker with general ease ... though a great deal was made about the fact they actually landed a punch (!)

    Skill, technique, heart, conditioning, talent and toughness will always out against someone who has less than these, even if he is bigger
    .
    Butter Bean is a living example of big but less talent.lol

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Saddo Boxing - Boxing