Head to Head Marciano against anyone under 190lb

OK interesting OE!

Nah not really to highbrow, jus' kidding...

 

Thanks for illustrating what is patently obvious to those that are not trying to "embellish" Moore's already fine record.:good
Bivins was a 5'9" LHvy/sometime cruiser.

 

5'9 38 year old James Toney did pretty well against boxing's big boys in recent times and I can only imagine how well he would have done had he been in condition. I dont think he was ever as dangerous as Bivins though

 

Did you miss this?

HW is 175 and over at the time Bivins fought.

 

Calling Bivins a HW is not an exaggeration to embellish Moore's record, it is stating a fact.

Who cares what his height is?

The majority of the HW divison in the 40s and 50s would fall into the cruiser range. And why would you describe 11 straight years in that range as "sometimes. "

Bivins was only a full time LHW for 1 year and only spent 2 years as a part time player in the divison. Do you call Holyfield a cruiser/sometimes heavyweight?

In truth you are denying facts to deprive Moore's already fine record. You are trying to suggest Bivins and Moore was the same size in those matches when in truth Bivins had a 18, 10, and 15 lb advantage in their first three encounters. Because in those matches..gasp, Bivins was a heavyweight and Moore was a light heavyweight.

 

:blood

 

If he had been in condition he would have weighed about 172/5lbs.Without a big punch he would have been stopped by the bigger guys,imo.Toney couldn't keep his big hooked nose out of the fridge.

 

There was no cruiserweight division in the 1950's.

Ewart Potgieter at 7' 2" and 330 lbs was fighting in a division in which Marciano was champion and Bivins was active.

This is just an historical fact.

I think there is no sense comparing the pre-steroidal era to the steroidal era. Obviously, the ability to bulk up with the use of drugs is fantastic, but those weren't available back then. The era from Figg to the 1960's is the natural era when a heavyweight was defined by Nature. And Figg-or Cribb-were not that different in size from Marciano or Patterson. The current crop of heavyweights are altered by drugs. This can produce rather odd effects. I remember an interview with a fellow whose job was to articially inseminate turkeys. Why? With growth hormones being fed to the turkeys, the tom has become so oversized across the chest that he can not mate with the hen. Domestic turkeys would be doomed to extinction in one generation regardless of outside factors because the males couldn't mate with the females. Man, this is getting to be a weird world.

Bottom line with boxing--I personally find it not only a bit silly, but even a bit offensive, to deny men who fought as heavyweights and indeed were champions as heavyweights were not heavyweights because your narcissistic standard is formed by modern alteration by drugs.

*This point of view seems unique to boxing. I have never heard it from anyone discussing old-timers in other sports.

 

And?

 

Yet, Bob Wills is 20x the artist of today's country "musicians"….

 

Again, this is really not a discussion about what would be deemed heavyweights today. It is about 190 pound and under fighters.

 

I noticed that. There does seem to be a lot of Johnny one-notes on this board who really aren't up to discussing much else besides size, and are simply out of their depth when discussing another historical era.

 

Bivins also weighed well over 175 for the vast majority of his long career but apparently he's a LWH/sometimes crusier.

Whatever it takes to keep from saying Moore knocked out a HW with 15 lbs on him, I suppose, no matter how illogical and factually wrong.