Heavyweight Size and Progress

Interesting dilemma. Assuming equal talent, you'd have to say a bigger fighter beats a smaller one, especially with HW for obvious reasons. But that's the problem with boxing records; you can have an accurate figure with regards to height and weight but not in respect of talent. Talent is the great imponderable, which is why there'll always be opinions regarding match-ups from different eras. As we are about to discover...

 

The combination of size, athleticism, and skill is hard to beat but it's not impossible. Sure being 6'6+ with a good jab, power, movement, and all around solid fundamentals is the best template for a HW to have, but a special smaller HW can definitely win.

 

Somewhere between important and real important would be my vote.

Holyfield was the best small heavy in the past 30 years, yet he's 1-4 vs Bowe and Lewis on fair score cards.

Wlad, Vitali, Lewis never lost on the cards in their primes. Skills combined with a big reach and height advantage are tough to beat. And if the big man is a power puncher multiply that x2.

From 1990-present, the #1 heavyweight was pretty much a giant. Not a fluke or fad, this is a long time trend.

 

good

My thoughts exactly.

 

a poll like this, if you could facilitate it in the real world, would be a great way of trapping a mass of just kliturds into a room, bolt down the doors before roasting them alive.

wait for some kook to ask if I think size isn't a factor now...

 

Instead of actually arguing your case you just spew more Anti-Klitschko rhetoric. Keep it classy. :good

 

why need for a case, explain.

 

i'm not a ret.urd, no need to be lose your cool just because you are getting your azzes en masse handed to you by one guy, like lewis ripping vitalis face off or like LHW Byrd destroying him.

size is a factor. how do yo think someone like waldo stayed in possession of belts for so long.

 

Talking in generalizations is pretty pointless. Obviously, Lewis and the Klitschkos can't defeat any heavyweight in the history of the sport. Their multiple losses, often to not-elite smaller men, as well as a few dodgy decisions in Lewis' favor prove that they can't. Boxers are all humans afterall.

I'd like to address a few points here though.

When making hypothetical match-ups between Lewis and the Klitschkos, and pre-Tyson era heavyweights like Ali or Louis, one needs to consider a major change in the sport - the abolition of the additional 3 round championship distance. This is a massive factor that can't be ignored. If you take Ali and put him in a 12-rounder with Lewis, it obviously favours Lewis. His bulk is only an advantage as less rounds are fought and Alis superior conditioning doesn't come into play here, like it would if Lewis had to fight another 3 rounds which would expose major weaknesses. Lewis, who often had gas leaks in 12 rounders would struggle immensely fighting a 15 rounder against a fighter far move prepared to go the distance than him.

Another issue of course is glove change. With 5 oz gloves, it didn't matter how big you were because a punch from a 200-pound puncher would clean your clock just like one from a giant would. That was another reason why bulking up wasn't encouraged - it wasn't necessary.

A flush punch from Joe Louis wearing 5 oz gloves would make Vitali wish he was taking punches from Sanders again.

So when it comes to hypothetical H2H scenarios, these differences need to be acknowledged - because under modern rules, obviously the giant would have tremendous advantages.

Another issue that I'd like to touch upon is that, even in basic 12 rounders, a giant no matter how fit can not keep up with the pace of a smaller man. Wladimir Klitschko himself gassed out against Brewster in no less than 5 rounds and Brewster, who was able to take his artillery stormed back and knocked him flat on his ass.

In normal match-ups, their size, clinching strength and power can prevent smaller men from engaging which allows them to set their own pace which Wladimir Klitscko did so well over the last decade- but when a fighter has certain attributes as well as a good gameplan, this can be countered. A good example of this is Lewis' fight with Zeljko Mavrovic. Lewis, like always tried to bomb his opponent out, but when he realized Mavrovic was going to stay around and that he had to outwork him to a decision, he looked downright terrible. Plodding around like an oaf, he had to clinch and maul excessively, especially in the late rounds to keep Mavrovic off him and smother his work. Of course, in the end he won a relatively easy decision, but this fight exposed a fundamental flaw in his game. After the fight, he blacked out from exhaustion in his dressing room, so I wonder how he would have done if there were 3 more rounds to be fought.

Lewis himself admitted that Mavrovic was the most awkward opponent he fought in his career, and I agree. He really looked uncomforable. If that was a prime Larry Holmes, who like Mavrovic had an iron chin, and could set a grueling pace on top of being a far better boxer obviously, I quite frankly don't see how Lewis would win.

In short, size is an advantage, but can be countered by a good gameplan and specific physical attributes, particularly great conditioning and good punch resistance. :good

 

The bigger the fighter the less skilled they seem they don't have movement punch variety the stamina is an issue they usually just have size but that is something difficult to overcome if they know how to use it

 

when u get a doctorate and psychiatry postgrad then someone will listen to you, otherwise your opinion makes you closer to one.

by letting him rip his yee out, so true. kliturd self destructs once again, part 2

I abhor mayweather. another win for me, thanks - kliturd self destructs once again, part 3

no one said it isn't. why u arguing with yourself? part 4

 

There's no way you went to medical school you dope, get a life....

 

kliturd self destructs once again.

u could always ask me about the course, ask for my GMC number, ask me when I finish.start, ask me about my tutors names. Any number of proofs.

but no you don't want to proven wrong... so you chose to self destruct instead. good kliturd.