Primes, with the older Champions as the bigger fellows: James J. Jeffries vs. Jack Dempsey. Jess Willard vs. Joe Louis. Primo Carnera vs. Rocky Marciano. Does size still trump all, or do the smaller guys win? 12 Rounds. Modern rules. Time to adjust first.
I'm assuming this is another post on the tired old subject of old vs new heavyweights. This isn't some "gotcha" thread because very few if any at all "modernist" (or whatever the term is) believe that size alone is the only determining factor in a fight. If that was truly the case then why even have fights at all? Just measure the tape then hand the belt over to the taller guy. No one believes the thing you're trying to disprove, you're wasting your time. Honestly I cannot believe we're still having this conversation. There HAS to be more interesting conversations to be had. This sport is over 130 years old with 17 weight classes yet every time I look at this forum half the threads on the first page are about "old heavyweight vs newer heavyweight" Are you not tired of this? How many times do you have to see Lewis vs Marciano until you get bored?
Due respect but strange reply. First, there are plenty of threads here to allow one to take or leave any particular thread that doesn’t set them alight. Second, this is CLASSIC after all and certain subject matters and themes are naturally prone to be repeated. If you feel there are more interesting discussions to be had, by all means bring them forth.
Small guys sweep with Carnera being the giants best chance and hes got an 8 inch almost 75 pound edge. Size trumps skill when the size difference is substantial but in the first 2 fights its pretty small. Dempsey and Louis probably have the 2 best records against giant HWs of any of the early HW champs. This was in part cause they were among the only ones that got to fight multiple guys that big but still. Fultons probably the best giant HW of the early 20th century and Dempsey got him easy.
