View Single Post
Old 11-16-2012, 05:24 AM   #50
OvidsExile
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,246
vCash: 500
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Absolutely! View Post
Chisora had just come off a win against Helenius and having given Vitali one of his toughest fights in years. He was considered, if not the most skilled fighter around, certainly one of the toughest. I'd say he's a pretty good example to prove my point, which is that Chisora represented the squat muscled up "true heavy" of the division, whilst a fighter like Haye was still considered a Cruiserweight with all the baggage that term carries. Haye ended up destroying him with ease, a feat which neither Helenius nor Vitali were able to achieve. His 210lbs were certainly sufficient enough to get the job done. Whether he was the bigger man or not (and I'd wager that Paul Williams had much the same dimensions, and perhaps a longer reach) he was outweighed by over thirty pounds by a man who'd withstood the best the superheavyweight power punchers of the division could throw at him.
I really object to calling Haye a cruiserweight just because he started his career low and fights superheavies. He has the same dimensions as Ali and Holyfield. Larry Holmes was 6'3 too but with 3 inches more reach. Ken Norton was that tall with just two inches more reach. Max Baer was about that size. Pinklon Thomas had an inch less reach. These are big natural heavyweights. Haye is bigger than Joe Louis, much bigger than Jack Johnson. Jack Dempsey and Marciano were true cruiserweights, only topping 6'1 and 5'11".

As for Paul Williams who is 6'1" with a 79 inch reach, he has exactly one inch more reach than Thomas Hearns, whose career trajectory he most likely would have followed. If you remember, Hearns fought low and then ended his career after picking up the cruiserweight title. He had phenomenal power at lower weight classes, and was one of the all time great punchers and that's because he didn't really belong in those divisions. He could have been a light heavyweight or a cruiserweight his whole career if he'd wanted. Just look how reed thin he was as a light middleweight. 6'1 is a good height for a natural cruiser, 6'2" is a small heavy, and 6'3" is a decent sized heavy. 6'4" is a big heavy like George Foreman, Buster Douglas, or Tim Witherspoon and anything taller is a superheavy.

Guys like Eddie Chambers 6'1", Chris Byrd 6', James Toney 5'10", Dwight Qawi 5'6", and Sam Langford 5'6" are the real sub-heavies who had to put on weight to compete.
OvidsExile is offline  Top
Reply With Quote