George Foreman (First Career) Vs Oleksandr Usyk?

This is probably the best one of the lot, since Roy looked very obviously bulked up with the amount of muscle packed on his frame.

EDIT: Probably also Toney at 233 from the Ruiz fight compared to Lennox Lewis at 229 from the Bruno fight from (IIRC) 1993. If Toney from Ruiz is too fat for one's tastes, one could always go with comparing Toney in his slimmer heavyweight outings against Booker or Holyfield to one of the lighter versions of Deontay Wilder. You could also play around a bit with Chris Byrd's career.

 

There are plenty of HWs who have been significantly sub 268lbs that I'd consider as naturally bigger than Shannon Briggs who fought Jameel McCline, but I decided against citing him as its arguable whether or not he was in good fighting shape (as an asthma sufferer, his stamina was always poor, but that was likely exacerbated at that size), whereas Holyfield, Lewis and RJJ were the first 3 that came to mind that were definitely in great fighting shape at the weights I gave. There will be loads more examples though.

 

Availability of weight training and similar bulking techniques? Assuming natural fighting weight even conveys an advantage, it's harder to figure out what that weight is now that heavies can control their lean mass a lot better.

 

You used the word naturally in the question you asked that I quoted, so yes, I did mean i think Holyfield is naturally smaller than Foreman.

Naturally bigger for me has zero to do with those attributes. I'm not sure I'm 100% happy with this definition, but off the top of my head - to me it means if 2 men eat the same, both in type and amount, train the same, and one weighs substantially more than the other with similar body fat %'s, then he's naturally bigger.

 

I don't know. I'm hesitant to disregard common folk wisdom, though. It often exists for a reason.

Yes, I'm assuming non-obesity.

When you say "What would it look like," do you mean physical appearance? I'd expect an "unnaturally" big guy to have more muscle (and perhaps some more fat as well; maybe not) than his body would ordinarily have without an effort to bulk up. Like, if he was training and eating like an old-timey heavy, he'd be a lot lighter. An "unnaturally" light man would have the same kinds of effects that you see in people who make weight, although degree would vary. (Maybe dieting, maybe some amount of dehydration, etc.)

 

Ah right, gotcha.

Strength, power and punch resistance are the advantages to the naturally bigger man, all other factors being equal.

Using an extreme example to demonstrate the concept, lets say for arguments sake that GGG and prime Mike Tyson are, at their natural respective in shape weights, equal in those areas p4p. They are roughly the same height and reach. It is possible GGG could bulk up to 220lbs without increasing his body fat %. If he did, I think prime Tyson would be more powerful, stronger and have better punch resistance.

Clearly thier size disparity is way in excess of that which I believe exists between Foreman and Usyk, again, just used to explain the concept.

Just so I'm clear, I appreciate other posters may have picked Foreman to win and then used his natural size advantage as one of the reasons why, I'm not one of them. I think picking Usyk to win this fight is completely justifiable. I think Foreman's greater natural size is a factor, but in no way am i claiming it would be the determining one.

 

If I had to *guess* at the most concrete or verifiable effects of alleged natural size advantages, I think you'd look at energy systems and body dimensions.

Larger body dimensions, like greater reach, can often be quite helpful to a boxer. See Tommy Hearns for a ridiculously extreme example. This one is obvious.

Energy systems apparently (I haven't looked into this much) make bulking beyond a certain point impractical. Your body can't sustain the energy demands of the excessive muscles for your frame very well.

There might also be biomechanical or leverage advantages, differences in durability that come from thicker bones or (perhaps) neurological factors, but I have no idea what those would be.

The other confounding factor, though, are PEDs, which change the equation a lot. Early Foreman probably wasn't on them, so whatever advantages his "natural" frame would give him over 70s heavies, it might not give him a similar advantage over the athletically souped-up opponents he could face in 2022. You're no longer comparing apples to apples. So the "natural size" argument, depending on how you flesh it out, might actually undermine the old timers' chances...

 

Appreciate your reply but it was satire/humour, the definition of which I won’t also debate - since we already have enough to be getting along with.

All in all, I don’t think Usyk and or his camp falsely pushing his being heavier is just a possibility, it has a good measure of likelihood - and Usyk’s own words re the matter (that I quoted) support that likelihood.

Thanks for the quote on Foreman arriving in Zaire at around 230 lb - and your balanced view that he might have already started training before that. Also for your insight as to Foreman actually wanting to come in heavier than 220 lb. Good info.

Re Foreman coming in under his target weight - I could speculate that the postponement could’ve disrupted and caused George to land under his preferred weight - of course he wasn’t allowed to leave Zaire and became very despondent in the interim.

Just re the weight gain for Wilder from Fury 1 to Fury 2 (238 lb minus 212 1/2 lb = + 25 1/2 lb). Gotta say, at 6’6 1/2” to 6’7” and weighing 212 1/2 lbs, Deontay looked like a woefully underfed greyhound - he very much looked like he could do with a good feed and easily accomodate the extra weight on his frame - even at 238 lb there appeared more room for additional weight/bulk.

Usyk at 221 1/2 lb did not look like Wilder did at an emaciated 212 1/2 lb at all - at least imo, Usyk at the aforementioned weight appeared to have arrived at a well “reached up to” poundage.

I don’t believe I introduced walk around weight - I read Usyk’s walk around being introduced/discussed and actually mused myself as to why that would be - particularly if Foreman’s walk around weight wasn’t being examined in kind.

But I understand, the longer a thread goes, it becomes more difficult to remember who said what - it becomes more complex, multiple opinions coming in from every which way and good ol’ Chaos Theory comes into play -

 

Good to see you back CT. I hope you have been keeping well.

 

Thanks. Dunno how long I'll be around, given other stuff I have to do these days, but like I said elsewhere: it's always fun to stop in and visit you guys!

 

At this point it's ****ing chaos alright