How many HW champions meet U.S. Army weight requirements?

We're talking about a very specific subject, the growth in size of heavyweight boxers, not sports in general.

There's a difference between attributing this growth to a natural phenomenon that is out of our hands, versus a man made belief system developed through incomplete information and inherent flaws.

 

The U.S army requirements, i take it, are for new recruits.
They are guidelines to keep fatties out. Get those unhealthy fat McD's-fed kids to lose a few pounds before letting them in.

I don't think there's any U.S army rule against bulking up on weights and 'roids once you've been in a few months. In fact, in many units it's probably encouraged.

 

What difference does it make though ?

The heavyweights got bigger. That's an empirical fact we all recognize.
Why do we need to "attribute this growth" one way or another ?

Boxers are boxers. Size is size. Weight is weight. Why all this philosophizing about it ?

 

No they are designed for efficiency.

It's easier to cut out the anomalies, than to make special equipment for different sized people.

Vehicles, equipment, clothing, furniture, etc are going to be hard to use for bigger people.

Shaq probably can't fit in a Humvee. So what would his superiors do? Worry about special accommodations for him every hour? No.

Jess Willard tried to join the military and failed for being too big.

 

Well, all I see mostly is people just making stuff up, assuming stuff without first-hand knowledge and jumping to conclusions.

 

What's been made up here?
I noticed a wrong claim you made since this thread has been bumped, and that's about it.

 

Okay, that makes sense - at the top end anyway.
And nowadays we have more active heavyweights the size of Jess Willard.

 

The difference is that in one scenario, the size increase is due to a natural phenomenon. In the other scenario, it is due to design.

And in regards to the subject of HW boxers, it seems to be more of the latter, than the former.

 

Generally in these discussions, when training "methods" are cited, that's very rarely elaborated on in reference to any first-hand knowledge.
I'm not saying some things haven't changed or been introduced but it is over-stated.
For every boxer who makes a big deal out of cutting-edge scientific training, there are a few who really stick with same old school training. And only 30 years ago or so there was really nothing but old school methods.