View Single Post
Old 06-27-2007, 11:00 AM   #21
P4P King
East Side VIP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 24,156
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Originally Posted by Sizzle
There is a big difference between a fighter who fought most of their career at light heavyweight, and an ACTUAL lightheavyweight.

Gibbons was an actual lightheavyweight - He weighed 175lbs on fight night. In fact, he'd weigh a good ten pounds less than what most modern LHW's will weigh on fightnight. Some supermiddleweights would outweigh him.

Michael Spinks did fight most of his career at lightheavyweight, but he weighed in at 213lbs in his last fight Vs Tyson, and at 200lbs against Holmes,
Yes but if you take a natural light heavyweight and bulk him up to 200lbs you do not end up with a natural 200lb fighter you just get a pumped up light heavyweight.

Chris Byrd bulked up to 210 lbs but he still couldn't knock a heavyweight's hat off and he might well have been better off keeping his weight low to preserve his advantages of speed and mobility.

Do you think for example that Billy Conn would have fared better against Joe Louis if he had bulked up to 200lbs?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote