Very telling interview w Emanuel Steward

Nice interview. I agree with his choices in those mythical matchups.

 

If you add up all of Bowe's, Lewis' and Klitschko fights, they only lost one decision.

 

If there was ANY fighter that was completely wrong for Floyd, it'd be Tommy Hearns.

I don't think you could have made a bigger mismatch.

 

And neither fought a super heavyweight that was much taller, longer and heavier with skills. Rocky was behind on points a few times.

Corbett vs Jeffries 1 was even prior to the KO.

There are still quite a few posters who think size is no big deal and will conjure up names like Valuev and Willard.

If you're giving up 6 inches and 40 pounds it's like asking a light weight to beat a light heavyweight.

 

Bingo

 

My point was the guys you mentioned did not lose a decision because they were ko'd or never fought a skilled super heavyweight. How was this wrong?

 

No doubt size matters. But the example you gave here Mendoza is a little awry. A few pounds in the lighter ranks can be greatly significant, but giving away say 10 pounds as a heavyweight doesn't really count for much if anything.

40 pounds? Sure...depends ultimately still on the skill of the fighters involved though, as history has proven many times.
In general, a good big man will beat a good little man, I've got no issue with that.
There will always be exceptions to that rule too.

 

To clarify, anyone at heavyweight can get knocked out or injured. No one said they were unbeatable. I will say this. The power level and size of the fighters from the 1990's to present (dawn of super heavies with skills) is far more than most eras. As such the puncher's chace for champions is greater.

My point is super heavyweight with skills have huge advantages over smaller opponents, and if it goes to the cards they have won in all cases but one. Infact, they are seldom behind on the cards vs smaller men. Do you agree with the last paragraph?