Best examples of overcoming a significant size and power disadvantage

Hi Buddy.
Same for Langford ?
stay safe L81, chat soon.
Mike.

 

I picked Crawford to beat Canelo I knew the size difference wasn't that significant and Crawford had a height and 4 inch reach advantage aswell as a stylistic advantage.

It's not a weak example at all ? It's an example of Holyfield beating a fighter with a 49 pound weight disadvantage and a power disadvantage which is what the thread specifically asked for ?

We've had this Byrd/Vitali discussion many times and I don't agree with you I thought it was a very competitive fight.

 

I can't think of any. I doubt it has ever happened.

 

Balboa Vs Drago - with serious eye problems, PTSD, the weight of American pride on his shoulders in the midst of Cold War on Russian soil and no Mickey in his corner, plus the ghost of Apollo and his inaction over his head - this was surreal - almost as if written by Hollywood.

 

Foreman’s peak weight was closer to Holyfield’s and Holyfield was stopping higher quality guys than Foreman was.

Yes, we know you think Byrd’s pixie dust tore Vitali’s shoulder and he quit to avoid being knocked out. We also know about that Shakur scorecard.

As for Crawford, it’s the only time a 135 pounder has moved up to win lineal at 168 and good luck waiting for the next time.

 

Everyone from the period before time restraints on matches.

Sayers, Sullivan, Langan etc. those sorts.

There were big men before there was divisions for big men. Going back to Onomastos we have descriptions of modern HWs. Hell, even bigger men if you believe every word from every scrap of ancient doodad. Point being the size advantage/disadvantage game came with the rules that made it, not prior, not naturally, not without planned economic force behind it.

The best size through history is the sizes you already associate with "small" HWs. 150s-220s, or the majority of men who were capable of a following based on their ability to fight anyone who challenged them ... ... not time limits or weight divisions needed.

 

Yeah, Crawford was walking around at 186 prior to Canelo. Naturally they're probably more or less the same weight, just that Crawford has been cutting like crazy. The amazing thing with him isn't that he beat a great fighter on the slide that weighed pretty much the same, but that he had been the best by a mile in a division 21 lbs lower just two years earlier.

 

For me, it's much more impressive to beat a guy who's heavier on the scales, not only in the ring. Cutting a lot of weight for the weigh in takes something out of you.

 

Did Foreman have significant size and power advantage over Holyfield yes or no ? Which is what the thread asked for ? So what are all these nonsense mental gymnastics for ?

Byrd beat Vitali yes ? With a significant size and reach disadvantage aswell as power advantage yes ?

And we know you think a 38 year old out of shape inactive Sanders is apparently better than a prime Byrd.

Or your scorecard for Briggs vs Foreman.

So if you want to bring up dirty laundry I'll do the same.

 

1. No. Holyfield had a better record of stoppages against shared opponents than Old Foreman and fought them first, too. And his record of stoppages overall in the 80s and 90s is far better.
2. Byrd beat Vitali in the sense that Steven Regal kept defending his pro wrestling title without ever pinning anyone for a three count.
3. Sanders was far better and more dangerous.
4. Briggs landed significantly more power punches than Foreman and the professional judges were consistent with my scorecard. No professional judge even came close to thinking Zepeda beat Shakur, who basically 11-1'd him.

You get a C-. Find better examples Jonathan Banks beating Seth Mitchell.

 

1. Holyfield beat a fighter who had a 49 pound weight disadvantage and power advantage. Which is the criteria of what the thread asked for so I'm not sure why you're deliberately being so argumentative.

2. Whether you agree or disagree with how significant Byrd’s win is over Vitali. Its still an impressive feat of a much smaller fighter with no power at Heavyweight overcoming a Super Heavyweight which again is the criteria of the thread.

3. In your opinion not mine Sanders was 38 years old inactive and out of shape. Byrd is objectively higher rated than Sanders on any metric you use in regards to resume at Heavyweight.

4. And yet you're the only fan scorecard I've ever seen score Briggs over Foreman which says it all.

 

1. Foreman took all his Ls in the 90s at 256+ and was 250 in his only notable win during that time. No evidence of a weight advantage there. Just a guy who was too lazy to get down to 230-235.
2. No, you sound more like a lawyer scouring a decades old law code for technicalities.
3. You weren’t around for it. Sanders vs. Vitali was for lineal. Byrd had Wlad and Golota problems.
4. I’m no fan. I’m a source of objectivity like the professional judges who did not score with a Foremaniac handicap.

 

Not a huge difference in power between the two. Pac is probably the more solid puncher while Margarito was always an accumulation type hitter but because of the size disparity between the two you have to give Margarito the edge in terms of thudding power. The power difference is similar to that of Fury and Usyk IMO.

 

1. Holyfield beat a fighter significantly bigger than him with a power advantage which is the criteria of the thread end of.

2. You're the one making excuses for Vitali like you are his lawyer so I think you should look at yourself when making that comment. Byrd won with a size and power disadvantage which is the criteria of the thread end of.

3. I don't care if I wasn't around for it I've seen all the significant Heavyweight fights from that era and I'm well aware of the resumes of Byrd/Sanders. There is no objective boxing historian or fan that would rate Sanders above Byrd in any all time Heavyweight rankings.

4. You're a fan like me we are all boxing fans on this site and objectively your opinion is a very small minority amongst anyone who's ever scored Foreman/Briggs. I guess you also agree with the 115-113 scorecard for Holyfield over Lewis in their 1st fight, the same professional judge who scored the 5th round for Holyfield, who got pounded along the ropes for over 2 minutes and was outlanded 46-12 in the round.

Judges have bad scorecards all the time and can be objectively wrong.