Is it just a coincidence that the top 10 is populated only by 230+ pounders? Or does this have nothing to do with strength and power?
A horrible coincidence that doesn't change the science fiction goggle wearers grossly overrating of how much strength and power these guys have.
You can substitute any LHW of your choice. Stevenson, Beterbiev, Joe Smith if you want. Point is none of them are going to come close to matching the punching power of their larger brethren by simple virtue of their size. But why must they knock out an iron chinned monster like Ortiz to prove the point? Willard wasn't remotely as tough or of comparable build. I suppose you could substitute a guy like Breazeale, who's kind of similar I guess. That'd be pretty damned impressive actually.
You mean compared to blown up LHWs who are magically supposed to be able to punch harder than men fifty natural pounds heavier?
Deontay Wilder is 222 pounds. Some would argue that he hits harder than a 255 pound T.Fury. Size and weight are advantages in themselves.
Fury has good skills but he moves awkwardly rather than like a cat-like Dempsey. He's 6'9 so I don't hold that against him. This thread is asking how well Dempsey hits compared to today's heavyweights. It's not whether he'd do as well in this era, but whether he'd packed a good punch still in comparison to today's average.