The "Superheavyweight" Myth?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by cross_trainer, Nov 6, 2009.


  1. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    Unforgiven, you have got to be kidding me. Heavyweights would be fine at 200 to 210 pounds?! You must be a huge old school fan. I am to but I have come to the conclusion that no sub 220 pound heavy will ever dominate the division ever again. The best 230 plus pounders today are just too powerful and skilled. At best your theoretical small but fit heavyweight would be able to capture a portion of the title.
     
  2. Shake

    Shake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,633
    59
    May 4, 2007
    Never again? Mike Tyson weighed less than 220 in almost all of his fights. So did Holyfield.

    Just a love for dramatics, I assume.
     
  3. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    Yeah Tyson dominated over 20 years ago. And Holyfield wasn't dominant at all.
     
  4. rm36

    rm36 Active Member Full Member

    1,311
    8
    Jun 26, 2009
    Did he fight small opponents ?
     
  5. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    My point is that the best super heavyweights today are better than the best super-heavys of even Tysons era. So much so that even Tyson at his peak would not dominate today.
     
  6. Shake

    Shake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,633
    59
    May 4, 2007
    dezbeast, in your estimation, is this head-to-head the strongest era for the heavyweights yet?
     
  7. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    On average I would say yes. But I do believe that the very best today is not as good as the very best of a few years ago. For example, I consider Lewis better than both Klitchkos. But strangely I see Lewis losing to Ali, and Ali losing to Wlad. I have kind of a mathmatical system of determining the best H2H. It's far from perfect though. Some of the things that happen in the ring just defy logic. I have to constantly revise my system when I spot a variable that contradicts it.
     
  8. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    139
    Jul 6, 2007
    If you inserted a prime Holyfield and Tyson into todays era you dont think they would be able to dominate? They were both sub 220 pound fighters in their primes.
     
  9. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    139
    Jul 6, 2007
    :bart NOOOOOOOO WAAAY
     
  10. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    Note that the key word is dominant. That is being so good that seemingly no other opponent would come close to beating you. I don't think Tyson could achieve that status these days.
     
  11. lefthook89

    lefthook89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,569
    82
    Sep 28, 2009
    sorry dezbeast, but if you think chris arreola, sam peter, odlainer solis, and gomez can beat a prime tyson, then i suggest you leave ESB. what on gods green earth gives you the impression that these pilsbury doughboys can last more than three rounds against tyson?? if anyting, tyson would dominate even more in this era. these current batch of HW's may be bigger, but thats where it ends. their just bigger, they're not better, they're not faster, they're not more athletic. the klitschkos are the only exceptions, and their skills aren't all thats cracked up to be IMO.
     
  12. KTFO

    KTFO Guest


    You missed Tyson/Lewis did you? :yep
     
  13. dezbeast

    dezbeast Active Member Full Member

    552
    5
    Mar 1, 2009
    I didn't know how irrational you can be against people with differing opinions, going as far as suggesting that I believe that such and such a fighter would beat Tyson even though I never even hinted that they would. So I will discuss no more with you. You believe that Patterson couldn't crack an egg and then have the nerve to suggest I should leave ESB.