Ring Magazine web article on modern super heavies.

+1

I don't think the Holyfield/Lewis fights prove much of anything in regards to the topic.

The Holyfield/Bowe fights do, however, and they were very close and very competitive.

Furthermore, Holyfield was a pumped up 215, not a natural one. He really shouldn't be the example to compare against the super heavies. And even then he was still very competitive with them, so what does that show you?

 

and evander wasnt a massive puncher either

 

The new standard, gentlemen. :-(

 

IMO Holy out-boxed and out-jabbed Valeuv. And what's rare is to see a super heavyweight with skills.

It was Bowe who benefited from that break more than Holy. He was cut and getting pounded when Fan Man came flying into the ring. IMO Holy would have stopped him had it not been for that interruption.

But with his wife taken out on a stretcher, I think it's safe to say that his mind probably wasn't completely focused on the fight.

The problem with Holy had nothing to do with his size. It had to do with his warrior mindset and lack of discipline when it came to executing a fight plan. He'd be in there boxing very skillfully and the second he'd get hit with a bomb; he'd want to go to war.

 

Mendoza, nobody (well, few) are denying that size matters, but I for one can't see heavyweights getting much, if any bigger without it becoming a big liability.

Just as there is countless evidence of good big men beating good little men, there is also quite a lot of evidence to suggest that there is an upper size limit beyond which the extra size counts for little or nothing, and in some cases, is a drawback.

 

Bowe was 11 lbs. overweight. Holy was not.
Bowe was cut. Holy was not.
Bowe was getting pounded. Holy was not.

 

just look at most of these heavies. So much fat and very little muscle. No wonder the hw division is so bad

 

I tend to agree with that, although maybe not for the same reasons.

Yes, any fighter standing 6'6" that has good skills will be a real handful for just about anyone, but even now, in this day and age of big men, fighters like that are rare.

I'm not too clued up about modern heavyweight boxing, but to my knowledge only the Klitschko brothers are genuinely huge men that have the required skills to beat the best this generation has to offer.
Perhaps there are more like them waiting in the wings somewhere, but I can't see fighters of their size (with the neccessary skills) coming around too often.

In the last few years we have seen some massive men like Lewis, Grant, the Klitschkos, Golota, Bowe etc. come along.
Of those fighters, only Lewis and Bowe (90's) and the Klitschko's (2000 onwards) have made a serious impact at the top level. Valuev is a freak and not really worth mentioning anyway.

The irony is that for much of the last decade, it was the smaller fighters like Holyfield and Tyson making headlines. Okay, they were exceptional talents, but what about the likes of Chris Byrd and David Tua, who competed well at the top level?
Tua was thick-set, but he was short. Byrd weighed around 214 but couldn't crack an egg. Yet, they carved out a niche for themselves at the top level.

Perhaps I'm waffling a bit, but my point is that although select really big men of today have much better skills than the giants like Abe Simon or Jess Willard of the past, they still seem to be a rarity, with only one, two or perhaps three every decade coming along.
The majority of the fighters will, for the most part, still stand around 6'2" or 6'3".

What is a bugbear for me is the excesive weight a lot of these guys put on. When guys like Morrison or Mercer were coming up, they weighed around 214 to 220 pounds. Ruddock was about 228 or so.
At some point many of them just started getting heavier, weighing 230 or more, and for no apparent reason.
The added weight seemed to do nothing for their performances. Even Tyson, never a big guy relatively speaking, seemed to go with the more is more theory, weighing 230 plus for some of his later fights.
Did it help in the ring? Judging from results I'd say no.

That photo above of Sam Peter is telling. He has a lot of muscle, but also a big, bloated gut that surely is a result of growth hormone or something like that.
It looks like he weighs around 250 or so in that photo. Why such a high weight? How is that helping him, other than to make him slow and ponderous?
Shannon Briggs looked and fought like an overstuffed sausage at 270. He was miles better as a fighter when he weighed under 230, but for some reason beyond my comprehension his weight skyrocketed.

It's this meat-headed mindset of adding weight for weight's sake that gets to me. They may be heavier, more muscular and stronger than fighters of 30,40 years ago, but are they any better?

Boxing has always been a sport where all-round athleticism and endurance were of paramount importance.

 

That's certainly the reason he lost the first Bowe fight.
And had other fights end up a lot harder, unnecessarily, because of that.

But it certainly made for some entertaining bouts!

The three Bowe fights have a kinda weird dynamic. In both the first and third, Holyfield wins the first round with good jabbing and movement. Then gets drawn into a brawl and loses. In the second fight, it's brawling to begin with and he loses the first, but then (probably thanks in part to Steward nagging him about it) gets into the stick 'n' move, get in-get out groove and ends up winning that one.

 

Looks like I spoke too soon...

 

Well, it's just a delay

Whenever anyone says that the super heavies are too big to be beaten by mere mortals, I can't help but think Lewis, Bowe, Wlad, Valuev and Vitali's losses have almost all been to guys notably smaller than themselves.

The right gameplan and the right training and the 'little guy' can still win. Just because Valuev is 7' tall, it most certainly does not mean he's almost invincible.