why is it when a heavyweight is at 220lbs or below, people automatically say he's

too small, and should drop to a cruiserweight division.

Honestly that doesnt make a bit of sense to me. As far as im concerned a guy weighing 200lbs or over has just as good a chance as the guy 240-250, considering that most guys (except for Klits) carry more fat than they should.

It's this notion that you HAVE TO be big that is hurting most heavyweights, because a lot of shorter guys try to match weight with taller opponents.

There's nothing that suggests to me that a guy like Peter (240-260) or Arreola (260) would be succesfull against someone like Frazier, who on his best night was no more than 205.

It's silly how people throw around the term 'small'

When it comes to pure muscle, guys like Joe Louis, Jerry Quarry etc etc outweigh most guys who are 250+ if you dont count the fat % of most of these 'bigger men'

just a rant, somewhat curious for feedback.

 

and b4 anyone replies, no, this is not an attempt at hyping up past greats.

i just think that people make a bigger deal out of weight then there really is.

i think many would also agree that this generation's heavyweights have gotten fatter, not bigger.

 

and what makes you think that they have no chance, weight is it?

another person obsessed with #s on a scale, i could give tons of examples that would blow your arguement straight out of the ballpark but i wont, you didnt back up your position with any explanation so i wont bother either.

 

no not really.

 

i wasnt necesairly suggesting that heavies should cut to cruiser, quite the opposite actually. what i meant was if your frame has muscle and you're in good shape then you can be in the 205-215 territory and be succesful againt guys that outweigh you.

as i said before most guys in the division who are 240-250 have no business to be at that weight when you look at their physique, it's just laziness that keeps them at the weight that is not natural for them.

 

by your logic they should have put guys in the hospital then.

Lennox Lewis couldnt put away Holyfield who was much smaller than him, and concieveably lost to evander in the rematch, he went through life and death with mercer who was at least 5 inches shorter and also carrying a bit too much weight.

Klitschko routinely shows his dominance way late in the fight againt guys whom he should blow away before they get into the ring with him.

Klitschko and Lewis are large specimen and would be tough to deal with for anyone, but they are also exceptions when you look at other guys with similar stats.

 

I raised those examples because you brought up Lewis and Klit bros, if anything the competition in Lewis' days was more fierce than in Wlad's current era.

Now to personally address every name you mentioned.

Byrd is not a puncher neither is Chambers that doesnt mean that everyone their size cant punch, you need power in this division, to be a threat, and to be a star.

Chagaev and Ibragimov both were carrying too much weight. I was talking about conditioned small guys, not fighters who have double chins. Boths of them should have fought at 200-205 during their careers.

 

i didnt say weight wasnt a factor, i simply pointed out that people obsess over it a little too much, of course it's an advantage, but does mean that a smaller guy wont have a chance?

let me ask you a question, who would win a 5'10 215lbs Tyson or 6'6 245lbs Wladimir Klitschko?

thank you for making my point, that is if you made a sensible prediction.