No boxer shorter than 6 foot 4 inches would be favorite to beat modern super heavyweights

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Luis Fernando, Apr 1, 2018.


  1. john roberts

    john roberts Member Full Member

    334
    206
    Sep 5, 2017
    Foreman is 6ft 4 not 6ft 2 and if foreman fought in this era he could have made 240lbs easy but not necessary because the fighters were lighter and faster and wouldn’t have been good for him against the faster heavies of the day the only reason these overweight heavies get away with it is because they are all slow reading from the same hym sheet so to speak
     
    Jackomano likes this.
  2. john roberts

    john roberts Member Full Member

    334
    206
    Sep 5, 2017
    The only evidence is that the two world champions at the moment are in shape and not fat slobs that seems like good evidence that’s why butterbean wasn’t champ lol
     
  3. SmackDaBum

    SmackDaBum TKO7 banned Full Member

    5,191
    1,715
    Nov 22, 2014
    Just look at the bigger picture. HW's ever since the 50's have just kept on getting heavier. Its how the sport evolves. And there is an obvious reason for it: Size>Skills.(In general) Foreman aswell was a size bully for his era. Even Ali - especially in the 60's.
     
  4. john roberts

    john roberts Member Full Member

    334
    206
    Sep 5, 2017
    There is a cut off point they just can’t keep getting heavier because it Becomes a disadvantage eventually the heavyweight scene will change and there will be a mobile 6ft 3 to 6ft5 heavy around 225-235 who will change it all around. You never know if a nearly 40 yr old Povetkin knocks out Joshua in sept it’s all over for you super heavy guys lol ( I don’t think he will to old)
     
  5. SmackDaBum

    SmackDaBum TKO7 banned Full Member

    5,191
    1,715
    Nov 22, 2014
    Yeah I think its better to have 20% BF or above than 10 % especially if you already are the natural bigger guy. Just like they had back in the "golden era"

    Just have a look at Frazier and Ali here and compare them with 90's era: [url]https://www.robertedwardauctions.com/auction/2016/spring/1707/1975-muhammad-ali-joe-frazier-signed-magazine-centerfold/[/url]

    Both of them look semifat to me. Modern era bf%
     
  6. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,028
    Sep 22, 2010
    Excess size severely depletes your cardio. Are you guys adults? How can you live to adult life and not have worked this out?
     
  7. Luis Fernando

    Luis Fernando Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,120
    1,275
    Aug 23, 2017
    Fat and cardio have no direct correlation. A fat person can have better cardio than a skinny or a muscular person and vice versa.

    Anthony Joshua may not be fat, but he is BIG. Deontay Wilder is an exception. The rest of the top heavyweights, including Joseph Parker, Povetkin, Dillian Whyte, Jarrell Miller and Kubrat Pulev are all fat / chubby.

    At this point in time, we don't even know if Anthony Joshua for example is better than Jarrell Miller. Sure, Joshua has a better resume because of his sole win over an old Wladimir Klitshcko. But then again, a fat Corrie Sanders needed only 2 rounds to brutally stop a prime Wladimir Klitschko compared to non-fat Joshua needing 11 to stop a past prime Wlad.

    Furthermore, a fat Mihai Nistor stopped and demolished non-fat Joshua in just 2 rounds in the amateurs.

    So in reality, Joshua isn't strong enough evidence that fat is a detriment to the heavyweight division. Since Joshua hasn't proven to be better than certain 'fat' heavyweights like Jarrell Miller.
     
  8. Luis Fernando

    Luis Fernando Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,120
    1,275
    Aug 23, 2017
    Yup. Fat serves many advantages!
     
  9. SmackDaBum

    SmackDaBum TKO7 banned Full Member

    5,191
    1,715
    Nov 22, 2014
    Yes low fat in terms of cardio - yes. But try to wrestle with a bigger guy and your better running cardio wont help you. It takes way more energy to stand your ground then.
     
  10. SmackDaBum

    SmackDaBum TKO7 banned Full Member

    5,191
    1,715
    Nov 22, 2014
    If I were Joshua I would avoid Miller.
     
  11. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,028
    Sep 22, 2010
    of course, and his lesser cardio wont help him. and boxing isnt wrestling, perhaps you should try the wrestling forums.
     
  12. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,028
    Sep 22, 2010
    which serves you better, the fat in your head or the fat in your arz?
     
  13. SmackDaBum

    SmackDaBum TKO7 banned Full Member

    5,191
    1,715
    Nov 22, 2014
    Boxing is a very physiqal sport. You should know that. Every clinch give Miller a greater edge staminawise.
     
  14. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,028
    Sep 22, 2010
    why are you asking if I should know it when you just used WRESTLING as your example on a BOXING forum.

    Give me strength!
     
  15. Jackomano

    Jackomano Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,250
    6,976
    Nov 22, 2014
    This. I also question Joseph Parker and Whyte's listed heights. Joshua completey towered over both when he shouldn't if he was only 2 inches taller. I think Parker is closer to 6'2.5" than 6'4" and Whyte is most likely 6'2". Just like Luis Ortiz's listed height and reach being exposed as highly exaggerated. Ortiz for years was listed as being 6'4" and having an 84" reach, but the Malik Scott fight exposed Ortiz as being 6'2" at the most and the Wilder fight showed Ortiz's reach was closer to 76" than being 84".

    Even Chris Arreola was listed at 6'4" for many years until he fought Vitali, who easily had 5-6 inches of height over him. Ever since he's been listed between 6'2" and 6'3".
     
    john roberts likes this.