Who ranks higher P4P Joe Fraizer or Bob Foster?

Foster was a 6 ft 3 LHW got to go with Frazier. If Foster was better than Frazier P4P there was no reason he couldn't have beaten him at HW IMO.

 

You're confusing p4p with inch for inch. Frazier was bigger than Foster for the same fundamental reasons Tyson is bigger than Fundora.

 

I see P4P as more inch for inch. I think height is a better indicator than weight. Weight is a personal choice that can be customized, height is not.

 

Absurd take.

Who do you consider as having the natural size advantage, the 225lbs, 5ft 9ins David Tua, or the 118lbs, 5ft 11ins Panama Al Brown?

 

I didn't say weight doesn't matter. But the idea is Brown is fighting way below his "natural weight" and Tua way above his. Fact is a 225 5 ft 9 man is obese and a 118 5 ft 11 man is basically a skeleton.

 

Please humour me. Which do you consider as naturally bigger, from the perspective of having a size advantage in boxing were they to have fought?

 

I’m going to say Joe Frazier. He was only beaten by the very best and also beat the very best

 

Brown is naturally bigger though yeah Tuas absurd weight advantage matters a lot more than 2 inches.

 

So, in essence you're claiming that you believe it was possible for the naturally immensely heavily set Tua to weigh 118lbs and be in good enough shape to fight at a high pace for 15-rounds, as Brown did.

Tua would have had no chance of making 118lbs and being healthy since well before his teen years.

I assume you're trolling and hope for your sake that you are.

 

I did not create BMI. Blame the doctors.

 

Frazier

 

They have such different body types that I can't see how anyone can make a P4P comparison.

 

No doctor would claim BMI means all men naturally have identical body composition relative to height. Obviously.