6'3"-ish is a great height for a heavyweight

Yes 6 ft 3 is the "height of champions" but I feel lot of 6 ft 2s and 6 ft 4s on your list.

Buster Douglas another great 6 ft 3.

 

Holyfield is far from 6'3", in reality he's closer to 6'1". Larry Holmes a true 6'3" guy, was a couple inches taller than him. Foreman who was also a strong 6'3", dwarfed him.

 

Not a scientific theory but it does often appear that p4p skills diminish at a greater rate as fighters’ sizes progressively and incrementally exceed the 6’3” or thereabouts height/size threshold.

Sure, you’ll still get fighters who “move well for their size” but you’re not going to get a guy like Ali who moved incredibly well in absolute terms.

There are pros and cons to greater size and I think that Usyk advantaged himself optimally in respect of the cons when he moved up to HW, one of the cons not least being the far more limited fuel tanks of the SHWs.

 

"It's difficult to give an exact ratio of 6'5" people for every 6'3" person, as height distribution is a continuous variable, not a discrete one. However, based on statistics, for every 100 people who are 6'3", there are likely around 1-2 who are 6'5" or taller"

 

Foreman was a legit 6’4”. He was taller than Ali and Norton when he shared a ring with them, and taller than Holmes when standing next to him.

and Lennox Lewis was a very legit 6’5”, looking at him standing next to guys like Fury and Usyk.

 

Since 2000, we've had Vitali, Fury, Wlad, Wilder, and Joshua at the top. Usyk is outnumbered at a 5:1 ratio despite these guys appearing in the general population at about a 1:100 ratio compared to guys of Usyks height.

 

Yes, we should also consider how Usyk’s size measures up against the size of fighters who are actually prepared to compete at HW these days.

Meaning, how does Usyk’s size scratch up as a % of the whole given that perspective?

That more bigger men have gravitated to the sport doesn’t necessarily support the argument that bigger is better - but given their increased (majority?) numbers, the probability of a bigger man rising to the top of the heap is in their favour.

 

Yeah, I think Foreman was at least 6’3 1/2” in his absolute prime.

George had a good inch on Ali in their perfectly framed face off in Zaire.

I think Lewis was reliably reported as 6’4 3/4” when he was fully matured. Close enough to 6’5” so as to not quibble over it. Lewis has probably also lost a bit of height since his prime.

 

I know for a stone cold hard fact that Usyk is 6-2 & 277/332"

 

2000 isn't an arbitrary number. It's literally the start of a millenium.

Haye, Parker, and Povetkin have never been at the top of the division. Nor has Valuev who dwarfed them and probably made more title defenses (not fact checking).

Why are you arbitrarily cherry picking loses?

You seem upset by statistical probabilities.

 

It's simply an advantage, just like tall guys gravitating to basketball. I think you know that.