Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-15-2012, 01:51 PM   #16
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flea Man View Post
I agree.

I also think that Eddie Chambers would be a better heavyweight if he was an in-shape 190-195.

Blubber means nothing.

To bulk up a guy like Marciano? Wouldn't work. Seamus is spot on.
What about tunney, Dempsey, Walcott and some of the others.

I'm not talking blubber I'm talking muscle.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 11-15-2012, 01:53 PM   #17
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Yeah I know I was just getting that it there.

Meh, they'd be stronger but would lose a bit of what makes them all special IMO.

They'd be quality 210lb guys cutting to cruiser
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 01:59 PM   #18
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flea Man View Post
Yeah I know I was just getting that it there.

Meh, they'd be stronger but would lose a bit of what makes them all special IMO.

They'd be quality 210lb guys cutting to cruiser
Do you think that would be a worthwhile tradeoff when fighting the likes of bowe, Lewis, wlad and vitali? They hold a speed advantage anyways but they'd have that extra durability and strength needed for such a matchup.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:01 PM   #19
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,590
vCash: 1000
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

There is a big difference between a guy like Evander Holyfield and Rocky Marciano.. Holyfield is 6'2", not 5'10". He's got the frame for bearing more muscle weight and frankly was probably genetically better suited for bulking up to begin with. He was able to ad 25 lbs of muscle, while still maintaining a reasonable degree of mobility and power. Its possible that Rocky may have been able to boost his weight from 185 to say 200, and still been effective. But it still wouldn't have been enough against a giant heavy like a Lewis or a Klit. At 220 lbs, he would have been stuck in the mud. An easy target..
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:05 PM   #20
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo View Post
There is a big difference between a guy like Evander Holyfield and Rocky Marciano.. Holyfield is 6'2", not 5'10". He's got the frame for bearing more muscle weight and frankly was probably genetically better suited for bulking up to begin with. He was able to ad 25 lbs of muscle, while still maintaining a reasonable degree of mobility and power. Its possible that Rocky may have been able to boost his weight from 185 to say 200, and still been effective. But it still wouldn't have been enough against a giant heavy like a Lewis or a Klit. At 220 lbs, he would have been stuck in the mud. An easy target..
What bout Dempsey
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:21 PM   #21
Seamus
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 12,278
vCash: 1000
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
But would he though? We've seen guys putting weight on without much ill effect in terms of speed and stamina. Look at the guys listed in the op.
Yes, he would lose everything he was good at, even his power.

Plus, Marciano already had a suspect back which would be wrecked by more weight.
Seamus is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:22 PM   #22
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
Yes, he would lose everything he was good at, even his power.

Plus, Marciano already had a suspect back which would be wrecked by more weight.
So rocky is out, what about Dempsey and others mentioned?
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:24 PM   #23
choklab
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: bad to the bone and sexy
Posts: 5,561
vCash: 500
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo View Post
There is a big difference between a guy like Evander Holyfield and Rocky Marciano.. Holyfield is 6'2", not 5'10". He's got the frame for bearing more muscle weight and frankly was probably genetically better suited for bulking up to begin with. He was able to ad 25 lbs of muscle, while still maintaining a reasonable degree of mobility and power. Its possible that Rocky may have been able to boost his weight from 185 to say 200, and still been effective. But it still wouldn't have been enough against a giant heavy like a Lewis or a Klit. At 220 lbs, he would have been stuck in the mud. An easy target..

Evander Holyfeild was not 6'2''. He is closer to 6' than 6'2''. and Marciano was 5'11''. Evander was always listed as 6' 1'' as a cruiserweight. I think compared to Marciano Holyfeild was actually the smaller frame. If you check the debut weights of both and compare them I think it shows Marciano was naturaly the bigger guy.
choklab is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:29 PM   #24
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by choklab View Post
Evander Holyfeild was not 6'2''. He is closer to 6' than 6'2''. and Marciano was 5'11''. Evander was always listed as 6' 1'' as a cruiserweight. I think compared to Marciano Holyfeild was actually the smaller frame. If you check the debut weights of both and compare them I think it shows Marciano was naturaly the bigger guy.
Nowhere near.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:34 PM   #25
dyna
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,363
vCash: 1551
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo View Post
There is a big difference between a guy like Evander Holyfield and Rocky Marciano.. Holyfield is 6'2", not 5'10". He's got the frame for bearing more muscle weight and frankly was probably genetically better suited for bulking up to begin with. He was able to ad 25 lbs of muscle, while still maintaining a reasonable degree of mobility and power. Its possible that Rocky may have been able to boost his weight from 185 to say 200, and still been effective. But it still wouldn't have been enough against a giant heavy like a Lewis or a Klit. At 220 lbs, he would have been stuck in the mud. An easy target..
Didn't Marciano find out that his best fighting weight was 187 lbs?
He basically fought all his fights around that weight.

I don't think Marciano while being as tall as David Tua has the same frame to get 220 lbs on him without hurting his performance.
dyna is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:39 PM   #26
choklab
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: bad to the bone and sexy
Posts: 5,561
vCash: 500
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
It's always beenan advantage which is why we have weight classes.

I'm asking if the lighter champs from yesteryear could put on the weight successfully and compete.
I think yes. why not? most of them were bigger but cut weight to be 15 round fighters. Joe Louis was 230lb when he KO'd Nino Valdes in an exhibition but for a real fight he would always call 199lb his best weight.

would they be better heavier? perhaps not but good enough. Is anyone better heavier?

The real question is what would todays fighters weigh and look like if they trained like Joe Louis and rocky marciano? would they be any better? would they compete?
choklab is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 02:45 PM   #27
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 330
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by choklab View Post
I think yes. why not? most of them were bigger but cut weight to be 15 round fighters. Joe Louis was 230lb when he KO'd Nino Valdes in an exhibition but for a real fight he would always call 199lb his best weight.

would they be better heavier? perhaps not but good enough. Is anyone better heavier?

The real question is what would todays fighters weigh and look like if they trained like Joe Louis and rocky marciano? would they be any better? would they compete?
No that's not the real question. I'm interested in whether they could compete in this era in the hw division. To do so they would be bulked up to atleast 215 and I'm just wondering how effective the lighter champs would handle the extra 25 or so pounds.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 03:43 PM   #28
Unforgiven
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,587
vCash: 1000
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Dempsey would be okay.
He had the reach to be competitive, and was quick gliding in on his feet, so he didn't have a huge disadvantage in size regarding the closing of distance to land his punches.

He had a decent frame, could pack on some pounds, fighting around the same weight as Haye does.
Unforgiven is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 04:09 PM   #29
OvidsExile
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Washington
Posts: 954
vCash: 500
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

I don't think all of the guys you listed have the same kind of problems. The two most successful ones are Evander Holyfield and David Haye, both 6'3", 215 lbs, with 78" reach: Ali's measurements. They might have fought low for awhile like Ali did at the beginning, but 215 is their natural optimal weight. They aren't like the 6 foot tall guys who started at middleweight and moved up to cruiser.

Some of the modern guys you listed aren't much smaller. Adamek and Marco Huck are nearly 6'2". So their natural weight is probably around 205, which would still be fine if they fought in the 60s or even the 70s. I'd like to consider them separately since Adamek actually has a decent heavyweight record whereas Huck has had one fight at that weight and lost. Adamek doesn't have the same punching power to KO the big guys that he had at his natural weight. Above 200 pounds his record changes from 70 percent knockouts to 70 percent decisions. He can still get wins, but not against the elite and not in impressive fashion.

The 6'1" guys like Dempsey are probably right on the line at 195-200 pounds if they don't cut weight. Dempsey is a special case because he could really punch. He knocked out an old Jess Willard which shows he has comparable power to a 220 pound guy like Luis Angel Firpo who accomplished the same feat at around the same time. But there's no evidence that he knocks out A level 6'6" guys with good chins in their prime. I kind of see him doing like Frazier and Tyson with the hard punch, speed, bob and weave, style; cutting a fearsome swath through the division for a few years, burning out early, and getting beaten by the top A listers. The accumulation of punishment from that in fighting style would wear him down fast and if he doesn't retire early he'll be getting tuned up by everybody like Mike. He's actually a lot like Mike Tyson in that his knockouts come in the early rounds and if you could get into the 5th you are mostly safe. We have evidence of his KO power against Willard and Firpo, but he finished both in about 3 rounds and we don't know how well he could handle boxers that size over the distance.
OvidsExile is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 04:26 PM   #30
OMGWTF
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 353
vCash: 535
Default Re: how effective would the lighter heavyweights be today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
I hate to envision what a 5 foot 11 guy with stubby 67" arms, an extremely long torso and already thick legs, would look like with an additional 40 pounds on him. He would be an immobile fire plug, with less explosion, no stamina... a sitting duck for longer, speedier fighters to tee off upon...

Flawed concept.
It would enhance him if done correctly.

If he did body building to put the weight on then yes you are right it would work against him, he would be less enduranced and maybe slower (its shameful how much bodybuilding has crept its way into athletics./sports in general)

If it was done properly he would be an even harder puncher, faster, not much less endurance and more strength and a better chin.

People dont realize theres more than one type of muscular hypertrophy, and that sports science has had alot of advances since Marciano's day.

But having said that p4p he would probably be more optimal in a lighter weight division. (The best version of you isnt the best p4p version of you.)

Also you gotta remember people are bigger these days they have better nutrition consume more food etc who knows how rocky would have turned out if he ate what we ate. Its hard to compare eras there are so many complicating factors involved.

Last edited by OMGWTF; 11-15-2012 at 04:37 PM.
OMGWTF is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013