View Single Post
Old 12-28-2012, 05:48 PM   #84
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,862
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

[quote=janitor;14480714]
Quote:

For my money Foreman is more in the Jim Jeffries and Max Baer category.



That will be the acid test.

In practice I think that if the Klitschko's retired tomorrow, you would get a shuffeling of the pack, which might include a Chambers type fighter and a Price type fighter.



I don't think that it strictly holds true.



But Holyfield did split a series with him, thus undermining the principle that a great big un beats a great little un. Score it how you must, but they were clearly competitive fights.

Now great as Holyfieldwas, he was not one of the better punchers or finishers of his weight. What if it had been somebody like Joe Louis instead?



I submit that a smaller faster fighter with better finishing skills, such as Jack Dempsey, would be more likley to get to Lewis or Wlad than the guys who did.

For whatever it is worth, the only fighter of the 4/5 who has consistently dominated the smaller contenders, is Wlad.
Foreman is my boundary, anyone bigger than him is a shw by my book.

Of course it isn't strictly true, Armstrong beat Ross and Duran beat Leonard. But generally speaking it hold up.

I'm excited to see who rises to the top tbh.

Dempsey has the frame and abilities but not at 189 pounds, give him 200+ muscle and we'll see.

Holy was very competitive with Bowe but who could have fought that fight better at his size?
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote