Does size count even just a little bit?

I think there is a case for it. I would say "could" be better rather than "would" be better though. I really don't see the biggest guys being anymore relevant without PEDs than the biggest guys were before PEDs. You might get the odd exception to the rule. Lennox, Klitchko perhaps but that's it. Things would go back to how they were with the odd giant doing quite well.

We can't turn back the clock though.

I think if PEDs were available in the Joe Louis era trainers would be scouting for giants as they do now.

 

But the theory I am putting forward is that Giants really were not responding as well to boxing training without it. That's why trainers were not scouting for them as much as they do now.

Trainers always new the advantage of size, how to utilise reach how to develop power etc etc but physically something was missing from the very biggest and strongest looking specimens so far as boxing was concerned. Perhaps it was an extra level of speed or athleticism, stamina whatever it was they knew not to concentrate on the biggest guys even though there was enough of them about in America.

 

No, I am saying without PEDs giants would go back to being no more successful than they were before PEDs. Likely they are all on it now, big or small, but I think the advantage is with the bigger man now perhaps through all of the other changes. They went from almost irrelevant to vital in a short space of time.

 

This is how I see it. Statistical occurrence where by the outliers have shifted and the population has increased.

Combine that with the slight rule changes and it has a much bigger impact than PEDs imo

 

It's a theory too I agree. I don't see how both theories cannot live together. It's all together hard to prove if it is one or the other. Maybe way back when a giant was a rarity that was the case. Willard was selected purely to outlast a faded champion over an extended distance but in the main giants were considered limited, for example gunboat smith beat the same Willard giving away 50lb. Today there is probably no way Gunboat beats a Willard with both of them on PEDs.

But later giants were way more common in boxing and they still had not made as much as an impression as they did after PEDs

 

So what extra advantages does PED'S give to a bigger person than it does to an average HW?

 

The same kind of thing that allows a 300lb wrestler leap off the top rope 8 feet high. The smaller wrestler is not jumping as high or landing as hard even on PEDs.

If a giant wrestler can leap around like a smaller wrestler on PEDs then a giant boxer with PEDs can hook off the jab.

 

I don't see much difference between the giants of yesteryear and the giants of today. There are more today, that's all. So we probably have a few who look (and are) better than the best of yesteryear, and a few who look (and are) worse than the worst of yesteryear.

Tyson Fury, who I admit is very good, is clearly and obviously an "old school oaf". He has all the hallmarks of the cumbersome, ungainly and awkward, allegedly "unskilled" giants of the past, down to the love-handled farmhand physique.

 

This topic is getting crazier and crazier hahaha. 300lb wrestlers = SHW fighters hooking off the jab, that's a good one I'll give you that...

 

More giants equals more selection hence better giants on the whole, it's common sense but I do like reading what Choklab has to offer. Hahaha.

 

Anyone can hook off the jab.

 

I honestly think Fury is one of the most fortunate champs in history, not to undermine his achievements at all btw, but he managed to fight the most one dimensional champion in a long time.

It's frustrating how I couldn't see it at the time, but then again I didn't realise Wlad couldn't pull the trigger or had a weak mentality.

A man who built his entire success around controlling range had no answer simply because Fury had a bit more range and a bit more speed. Seem so simple with hindsight.

I still wouldn't favour Fury over Haye though. And that's a huge weight difference.