I think this is what it boils down to. To be fair, there ARE some extreme modernists who go out of their way to insult older heavyweights, but that is not always the reason for the push back. For whatever reason, plenty of Rocky fans need to make him out to be some sort of Greek Demi god who could easily overcome 50+ lbs of muscle+long reach+good skill and power from modern sized guys. But if you even suggest someone a mere 10 lbs lighter than Rocky (like say, a light heavyweight) could compete with him h2h they get offended and talk about how absurd it is due to the size difference. Those people always have a bizarre agenda and are very inconsistent.
The usual suspects continuously put Marciano and known associates in fantasy match ups with modern Super Heavies then get offended when every answer isn't "he's small...he can't add weight...pick him to lose by KO or we call you delusional." Frankly it's weird and boring, and a huge reason why I rarely post here anymore.
for me It all really depends on comparisons between the eras. There were pros and cons to fighting in the era that Marciano fought in and there are pros and cons to a fighter developing alongside what would be an unfair advantage over older fighters. Often there are, as you say, extreme modernists going out of their way to trash older fighters against those from generations that have benefited from the advances in PEDs to support their argument. Defending a non juiced generation against the juiced generation can cause outrage among the modernists. It can appear to be more healthy than somebody coming over as an extreme old timer. with me it is not so much that Marciano is this set in stone Demi god who can overcome anyone. But he can overcome classic sized heavyweights. So for me It’s more the issue that classic sized heavyweights went no bigger than 226 for many many years. 175-226 is classic heavyweight. Without PEDs and few rare exceptions that was the limit. In fantasy fights The question has to be would this modern fighter even be more than a classic sized heavyweight if he came up in that particular fighters era? Once there were enough 230-260 giants to create a whole new division you are really talking about modern day cyborgs that could never really exist before then. And the reasons for the existence of an exclusive super heavyweight division replacing “heavyweight” need to be addressed in all of these discussions.
Are you saying here that ONLY the use of illegal drugs or a "rare exception" can explain the size of heavyweights in the modern era?
I’m suggesting that there is a jolly good chance PEDs (which all sized fighters benefit from) have meant that more can be achieved from the tallest and longest athletes who were previously redundant as what would previously be considered a great boxer. We know there were plenty of giants of yesteryear but unfortunately for them, It could just be that before modern advances, that have changed the entire face of all sport not just boxibg, older traditional methods older rules prevented the domination of these men we see today.
I think that's "no", but I can't be sure? Are you saying here that ONLY the use of illegal drugs or a "rare exception" can explain the size of heavyweights in the modern era?
No, there possibly many other factors as well. I remember a debate we had once upon a time about the increase in sizes of gloves that hit a stale mate. Changes in number of championship rounds. Speed just wasn’t overcoming size like it used to. At top level we began to see size as more and more of an advantage didn’t we? We saw more heavier guys. We saw older guys lasting longer. And some of that was because more guys could get heavier in a more functional way. It is due to training and developing physically under modern training isn’t it? and it’s not just heavyweight. At heavyweight we are seeing heavier fighters. At all the other weight classes we are seeing taller fighters. And older fighters. Could this just be because of modern nutritional training advances and changes in weigh ins? Or can it be because of new ways to cheat the scales? New ways to cheat Father Time?
There are two reasons for me. 1) The population grew taller, in fact the height average height of the population exploded in the last century - average height appears to be plateaued based upon skeletal remains until last century, really, and then it all went off. So at the beginning of the century there were fewer very tall people. This matters because very tall has to intercede with athletic prowess - in other words when there are very few people over six four, there will be almost nobody who is over 6'4 and athletically gifted. So more athletic big men had emerged by 1980 than in all of history, by some distance. 2) Trainers weren't good at training athletic, flexible, explosive, fast big men because there were so few of them. As more emerged, trainers got better at training them, arguably not culminating until Steward worked with Lewis. So, combine increased numbers of big men, increased number of athletic big men, combine it with experience of training, and you're off.
Yes I do agree that these are elements too. There are more tall people because there are more people altogether as well. The percentage of men taller than 6’4” is still 1% of the overall population. Then there are more counties taking up boxing. But then there is a decline in the take up of boxing too. Has there been a study on the population of boxers as a percentage within the human population? So whilst I agree, more tall men, yes. As a factor it isn’t the biggest factor. The trainers are more open minded. That’s a certainty. Weight training is accepted. Strength and conditioning coaching. But didn’t all this get introduced around the time advances were made in all sports? The PED boom? One factor I am open to consider is the diets of the working classes. Boxing is a working class sport. The percentage of tall people from the working classes can differ from the percentage of tall people in the middle classes. And again this can differ from one country to another. yet the diets of poor people producing tall people who grew strong enough to reach their full athletic potential must have improved on its own. There is evidence that the age of children taking up sport can effect the size of an adult too.
Performance enhancing drugs don't make people taller. Well, they can, i mean there ARE drugs that will make you taller when you're very young that will coincidentally make you better at sport through being tall, but I presume you aren't talking about these. What PEDs really do is aid you in recovery; allow you to train for longer; in instances of HGH and some steroids, encourage muscular development. But someone like Ernie Terrell: This content is protected Can very obviously add 20lbs with a serious weight training regime. Now this: This content is protected Could very well be the body of a cheat, but there's no proof of that and he doesn't look unnatural, at all. Everyone who trains seriously in a gym will tell you that this physique is not difficult to obtain with hard work, and hard work is his job. In the parlance of the time it wasn't considered wisdomw though. Parker is shorter AND heavier than Terrell and it's not because he's a cheat I don't think. But keep in mind, most functional PEDs aid in recovery and increased stamina in training, not direct gains in size.
Well, diet cannot be emphasised enough. I've spent the last few years in China, and I've seen first-hand how diet affects size and stature. The rural, country folk are generally poor and eat food befitting their financial status. Almost to a man, they are quite short (less than 5'7") and very thin. In the cities, this is changing quite fast. People have more wealth, eat much better, and consequently are usually taller, some even exceeding 6' (though rare) which I never saw in the rural areas. Diet is absolutely crucial. As you say, the acceptance of weights also changed the game significantly. With that, came the introduction of PEDs and specialists like strength & conditioning coaches and nutritionists. It's all added up to stronger, heavier men. It can be seen in certain other sports, too. The sport of Strongman was for years dominated by guys around 6'3" and about 320 pounds. Nowadays, there are very successful athletes standing well over 6'6" and weighing 400 pounds or more.
I will say that only a radical change in training practices can explain the size of heavyweights in the modern era. If a fighter ahs never failed a drugs test, then I give them the benefit of the doubt, so I will not comment on whether PEDs are the key factor in this.
Literally no one on the face of the Earth defends modern fighters over old school ones solely because some modern guys are on peds. You are also, once again, assuming all modern fighters are on peds. These are very loaded statements. And that has nothing to do with my original point. There is nothing healthy about scoffing at a light heavyweight being competitive with a man 10 lbs heavier while simultaneously believing a 50 lbs difference is no big deal. It's a contradiction at best and hypocritical at worst. Except you literally have multiple old school heavyweights who weighed more than 226 on multiple occasions: Jefferies, Buddy Baer, Willard, Carnera, Simon, etc. I have pointed this out to you going on 5x now but you keep ignoring it. There were also people who challenge for the title that weighed less than 175 such as Fitzsimmons or Billy Conn. The 175-226 range is something you made up and was never even so much as an unwritten rule. The only thing that is true about this range is that the average hw rarely weighed greater than or less than this range but it was by no means the gold standard. Sure, it's entirely possible. You do not need to take PEDs or gorge yourself at the local buffet to weigh more than 226 and have the stamina to fight for 15+ rounds because it has been done multiple times. Just keep repeating the same thing over and over even though it has been proven wrong until people get sick of talking to you? Is this your strategy? What is the point? Do you just enjoy going back and forth endlessly? Well this I can agree with, there is no point in having such a narrow range for cruiserweight and then leaving such a huge gap for HW since most modern fighters just end up weighing 230+ anyway.
If i'm absolutely honest I think most heavies will have used something at some point to aid them in some way. But there's a difference between training muscles on the comeback trail with drugs and using HGH to add forty pounds. The former is probably most fighters; the later is Baby Miller.
I know this, I simply use the word PED as an umbrella for all other types of modern stimulation.. doesn’t growth hormone improve size? Wouldn’t you say that There are different types of previously unavailable training and dietary programs, legal and illegal that produce a heavier or lighter version of an individual today? couldn’t it be that this are important in changing the face of all sports not just boxing? I like the examples of Terrell and Parker. They both show the body that the training trends of their era produce. I guess Parker would weigh less in an earlier era and Terrell would weigh more. A coach from the 1940s might keep Parker lower and he would feel weaker and less coordinated boxing in those times. Chasing smaller men around the ring. In those days he won’t find a coach that will find a suitable strength and conditioning program that will allow him to be stronger and more explosive. likewise, Terrell can improve. He can be stronger in the later era. He will hold more weight. And he will be fighting slower men too. The modern era suits Terrell who had previously been gangly by comparson.
