Greats of the past vs bigger modern fighters

Harry Greb was a middleweight who fought middleweights. He never beat any modern sized heavyweights. Wait he beat somebody named Al Benedict who had a record of 10 wins and 25 loses. We know how great Big Al was. Al Benedict was the only 200 pound guy Greb fought in his career.

Wait JLP 6 just like every other little kid here you heard Greb fought heavyweights right? Being 170 could mean you were a heavyweight in that era. The vast majority of the people Greb fought were around 160 or 170.

Thistle why would we need a super heavyweight division when Corrie Sanders a guy who was 6'4 230 knocked out Wlad? Sanders is roughly the same size as guys like Foreman and Lyle from over 40 years ago

Also Marciano and Greb would of knocked out Lewis because this forum says so. Even though 160 pound Archie Moore knocked Marciano down with one punch Lewis couldn't. All because the people on this forum live in their fantasy world.

 

Barbados Joe Walcott would knock Nikolay Valuev TFO.

 

1 ) Yes.

2 ) If the fighter has edge on speed, skills, and defense, sure. Look at Chris Byrd.

3 ) Depends. Power can neutralize any advantage provided it lands.

 

Find a hobby

 

two comments

1--athlete's in almost every sport have exploded in size. As I posted in another thread, probably a mediocre modern NFL team could defeat the best NFL teams of decades ago from a time when the biggest players were in the 260 to 275 lb. class. Doesn't make them "great" in any meaningful sense to me.

2--but historically some records put up by certain fighters (or teams in other sports) of the past are unique and mark these men as historically "great"--Louis holding the title for 12 years and making 25 defenses, Marciano cleaning out the division without ever losing a fight, are the top examples.

*bottom line. In the old days in fantasy fights (for example Dempsey vs. Louis) you were judging a horse race with the contestants on equal terms. Putting any classic champion against the modern supplement fighters is sort of like racing a horse against an automobile. It just isn't a fair contest.

**I don't see beating giant fighters in the old days as meaning much, as they were never the best out there, and in fact were generally not very good. Dempsey and Louis beat giants of the day, but had much more trouble or even lost to sub-200 lb. fighters like Tunney, Gibbons, Schmeling, Conn, Walcott, etc.,

 

I think it's important to take the overall time frame into account when discussing older, smaller greats against bigger, modern fighters.

For example, I think there are numerous smaller fighters with either the pedigree or style to have success against bigger, more modern heavyweights in a one-off scenario or a very short HW campaign.

Where things don't add up for me is when people expect the same level of career success if the old timer were exclusively fighting 205+ lb fighters (and, more commonly, 215+) for their entire career instead of primarily 180-190 pounders. The added grind and wear and tear of facing 40 guys that are all 30-70 pounds (or even more) bigger fight after fight would certainly affect longevity and overall career success.

 

Sometimes credibility is sacrificed 'cause guys either do not look up basic facts, lie to support their cause, or do not even consider their wild bias. Archie Moore was a lean 188 lbs. when he fought Marciano at 188 1/4, which is a world of difference from 160 lbs. They say it right at the start of all fights too! [url]http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Rocky_Marciano_vs._Archie_Moore[/url]

Here are the Klitchkos listed as having an 80" & 81" wingspan, not an 86" reach. [url]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/12/wladimir-and-vitali-klitschko-a-tale-of-the-tape[/url]

Sawyers, Janitor is a very rational & civilized long time poster, seems to have many "hobbies", & you as a Journeyman indulge seemingly the hobby of insulting him for no reason. You had nothing tangible to contribute to the debate there.
You are the one who should find...A better way to behave & to grow up.

 

Yes, this is true. When the heights and reach are close to even, a much lighter more mobile boxer ( below 200 ) can give slightly bigger man fits. Example O'Brien vs Jack Johnson or Conn vs Joe Louis.

But this vanishes when the smaller man gives up a lot of height and reach vs a skilled super heavyweight.

 

Very true Morbious and Mendoza

 

You...can't...compare...eras!
Put the 20's-30's-40's champions into the 80's-90's-2000's
Put the 80's-90's-2000 champions into the 20's-30's-40's.
IMO its a simple fact.

 

Hamburger, at least you are only reflexively caustic here, not abusive-you project your Darkness on others when you taunt for attention.

1) Toney both used steroids AND got fat. This is a completely irrelevant comparison to Archie Moore in terms of what is natural. Moore & many fighters were much lighter when they started-though you should look up weights to get them right, you tend to exaggerate-someone like Ali was a LHW & then a lean 212 at his peak then heavier before he got chubby. A natural progression of adding muscle, & dveloping bones & filling out when compared to very young.

2) Moore had the height & bone structure to naturally carry 188 without looking at all fat or blown up. With modern weight training he would have been more.

3) You said: " Even though 160 pound Archie Moore knocked Marciano down..."
Honesty must compel you to admit you were SAYING Moore was 160 in his title fight, whether lying or just mistaken. I do not assume the former.

4) Have you paid any attention to what I wrote, or just projected a belief onto me?

I am neither extreme: yours than smaller HWs coud not beat any good big guys, nor that size would not have him struggle or lose against at least some behemoth modern contenders.

5) Those guys were legitimate contenders & very good. Most guys do not get to (or avoid sometimes) fight top fighters or ATGs at their peak.

6) I did not bring up Marciano's record. But Ted Lowry DID deserve the win the 1st time, in a match he was fined for passivity/tried to tank, a connected fighter. LaStarza was close but from what i read am unconvinced he was robbed.

So you lazily assumed incorrectly what I believed. In any case, you could easily be accused of living ina simplistic, reactionary fantasy world.

I do not presume to know if you need a hobby. Just more covility sometimes.

 

Again Hamburger you are wasting your time. It is generally accepted that both K brothers, and Lewis have reaches ( wingspans ) of 84 - 86 " yet people will dig up anything to justify their own agendas.

Like ABC news is a reliable source.:roll:

These people deal in sensationalism, and falsehood, to sell themselves in competition with other " news " outlets.

Facts and reality are irrelevant to them.

 

You reveal such a deficiency of knowledge of the sport in this single post it is almost mind boggling.

Your brain in your skull rattles like a bean in a boxcar.

 

Attitudes changed about weight at heavyweight. Heavyweights can be tall or short but all that really changed was the weight. Once the more athletically gifted heavyweights started to slow themselves down with artificial weight it finally allowed giants (who had never been a serious factor before) to finaly become competative at heavyweight. That is all that really happened.

Lennox Lewis, Bowe and Vlad all fought under 229lb within the modern era. Bowe and Foreman both got under 220! At that kind of weight even the smallest of champions would not be giving away rediculous amounts. Heavier they were just slower and could not have done 15 rounds or could have afforded to take so many shots from 6oz gloves. And that's the exceptions among the so called superheavyweights who were actually decent.

 

The point about Harry Greb, gentlemen, is that he routinely beat men who outweighted him by 10-15-20-30 pounds. The point is that he beat them because he was a better fighter despite the fact they they were much bigger. A lot of these men were contenders. I am not putting him in the ring with modern HW's who outweigh him nearly 100 pounds, but 20 and 30 pounds were not that much of a problem for him.

Yesterdays heavyweights would be fighting guys who had 20 30 pounds on them. I think the smaller guys would have the advantage because of movement, quickness, power, and defense. These fighter today only have mass. if that is enough for you then so be it.

Why was Holyfield able to go 24 rounds with Lewis when he outweighed him by 30 pounds? Sanders was 225 to Klitschko's 242. Lamont Brewster of all people KO'ed this Klitschko character when Klitschko outweighed him 242 to 226. Both fights combined went 7 rounds.

This is a conversation for.... Nevermind.