Who in the last ten years was stronger than Liston?

In both fights, the fighters got into clinches, which can be a great test of strength.

You're not pushing Foreman around in the clinch for instance.

I'm just pointing out that both Dempsey and Louis fought people 50+lb bigger than them, and they weren't getting handled in the clinch. So it seems that what many people are saying in this thread about size not being a perfect predictor of strength adds up.

 

In watching those fights, did you regard those clinches as "great tests of strength"? Be honest. Watch how the bigger men acted in those clinches.

So just to be clear, it sounds like you do think that Louis might have been as strong as Carnera?

 

So you're back to suggesting that there is only a very weak correlation between muscle mass and strength?

 

No, I'm saying two individuals who are proportionately as close to that in size, is not a great enough sample to expect any particular outcome.

If we made it 25 men of 212 pounds, and 25 men of 245 pounds I'd expect a clear divide with the top half of strength coming mostly from the second group, but still wouldn't be all that surprised if the strongest man happened to come from the first group.

 

I don't maybe, maybe you can help me work it out.

When Foreman manhandles people in the clinch, I attribute that to his strength. Are you with me so far, or do you have different reasons?

When Louis and Carnera go into the cinch, Louis imposes his physical will on Carnera, forcing him backwards, or to a side of Louis' choosing.

So as unnatural as it is to think that trimmed Louis is stronger than 1930 Hercules, what other conclusions can I arrive at?

 

Random tangent:

I watched Louis Carnera again to see the clinches, and omg Louis ****ing destroyed that guy.

Carnera starts off the fight well, circling and jabbing constantly. Keeping distance, and his defense in tact. And Louis just wears the poor man down.

I wonder if anyone think a Klitschko would handle the fight differently, because Carnera is no oaf in this fight. He fights with skill.

https://streamable.com/sq5i
That last left hook to the jaw. Oof!

I'm so ****ed there's no HD version of this fight. It would be perfect.

 

You could reach any number of other conclusions. Which clinches are you referring to though? I only recall one in particular, where Carnera clearly backed up because he was trying to free himself from the clinch, not because he was being driven back. Similarly, in Dempsey-Willard, Willard has no interest in muscling Dempsey around but just wants to be separated so that he can get some distance and start punching again (in several instances he basically stands completely straight up while Dempsey is trying to push him around, and raises his hands for the ref to break it up).

 

I wonder if anyone seriously thinks a Klitschko wouldn't handle the fight completely differently? They're basically better at every aspect of boxing. Both are especially much, much better than Primo at avoiding incoming fire (and Wlad at suppressing it altogether), both appear to have sharper jabs and especially 1-2s from outside.

 

Here is Wlad vs Sanders. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FfVxSHGl-M

He looks WAY worse than Carnera did against Louis.

Carnera would probably beat Sanders that night.

By the way, it's also another example of your taller fighting coming in with one jab at a time to a smaller mans range.

 

Age is starting to take a toll on early Klitschko footage.

He looks more oafish by the year.

 

What makes you think that Carnera would have beaten Corrie Sanders?

 

Can't argue with you that Stewart would've helped Primo!

 

I have to agree with you on this one. Young Wlad looks way more Carnera-esque to me (except wrt his punching technique). It's amazing how much he loosens up under Manny. This doesn't get talked about enough.

 

How much would you say arm wrestling ability has to do with strength in boxing and strength overall?

 

You wouldn't think that 33 lbs of mostly muscle probably would make a difference? Does that apply to 212 and 179 lbs as well?

Well, I would in both cases. Because there is a causality between muscle mass and strength. And if the difference I know with certainty between two persons is a difference in muscle mass, the logical conclusion would be that there probably is a difference in strength too.

It doesn't mean that it must be so. There are other factors than can come into play. But if I have no real knowledge of any such factors, I would of course base my conclusion on the one factor I know about: the difference in muscle mass.