It's well understood that size matters plenty at lower weights. Heavyweight size is much less a factor. Excessive size means you are slower and need to carry that weight over distance which is a strain on the body. Speed and skill usually trumps size. Boxing in the end is a very high skill sport not the WWE.
Yeah, it's because people don't have a clue what they mean when they say "pound for pound". If the concept isn't completely applicable to two men of different (and officially measured) weights competing head-to-head in real life then it's meaningless.
its not an opinion you should be after. its fact. Each human heart has limitations on what size of body it can service during hard cardio activity. No amount of belief or opinion changes that.
finally a person coherent,well said!! tyson was shorter, but being 5'10 and weighing 220 pounds compared with 6'3-6'5 210-230 pounds guys... tyson was "bigger"
Tyson was outweighed by 20 lbs plenty of times. When does someone start having a weight advantage to you? When it fits your agenda? gtfoh and go make up lies about someone else. The mods need to ban your ass a 4th time.
What is going to make more of a difference? Giving up 10 pounds at flyweight or giving up 10 pounds at heavyweight?
Erm, Foreman / Frazier? Both possessed similar power and skill levels, the weight advantage was negligible but Foreman's height and reach advantages played a massive role in the outcome.
Are you kidding? Foreman hit 10x harder than Frazier and was deadly with just about any punch. Frazier on the other hand only had a left hook.
^^This is what happens when someone can't come up with a response that supports there own personal agenda.