Byrd succesfully bulked up and carried 205lbs just fine, looking trim and with fine stamina. He still lost every round that there ever was between them. If he weighed in at 160 lbs, it would've been a different story. On a sidenote, i think he would've outgrown supermiddleweight sooner or later. For the first Klitschko fight, he said he left training camp at 201lbs and then bulked up to 210. Frankenstein, right..... but there is no way i see Frankenstein getting outboxed for 13 rounds by a 167lbs Conn.. in fact, no one has ever been ahead against him after six rounds or more. So from where i'm watching, Frankenstein is pretty effective. Klitschko can throw a short left hook with full power on it (see the Barret fight or the 12th round of Wlad-Peter), can throw long right hands (apparant in any of his fights), short right hands (KO of the never stopped before Thompson recently), a 1-2 that no one has been able to get away from, he can hook off the jab (watch the Brewster and Mercer fight), he can score a knockout throwing a quadruple left hook (Austin).
Do you think that Chris Byrd hit harder than Stanley Ketchel? If not then being droped by Byrd is as bad as being droped by Ketchel or worse.
fitzimmons and choynski were middleweights, whats ur point? ketchell hit as least as hard as those turkeys
Jack Johnson would box circles around both Klitschko Brothers. IMO, Johnson is the only other heavyweight in history that compares to Ali in terms of reflexes and overall speed. Wlad and Vitali wouldn't be able to handle his movement and counterpunching.
Byrd wasn't trim at 205lbs, he was bloated and bulked up, and managed to get down to 175 for his last fight. The simple fact is Byrd was never a puncher at 160 in the first place so ofcourse he wouldnt threaten any heavyweights Im sure 1900s fighters may have bulked up to add more strength if they had todays bulking agents it wouldnt make them hit incredibly harder. Byrd is considered a big win but he was beaten in 5 by Ibeauchi before Wlad got to him first time, and lost in 1 sided losses to Povetkin and George after the rematch. Thats not to mention any of his gift wins
Johnson's style is often bullied into trail of whether it worked well at all and Tunney incurs the same predicament; compliments of the misinformed fan. As ineffective as their styles may have looked, where is the rule to suggest that they would not mesh with today's era? Johnson knew more about hitting and not getting hit than any heavyweight today could ever fathom - the core rule of the 'sweet science'. A size advantage and plenty of safety-first jabbing may stop one more conversation with a ringsider...that's about it. Johnson was flexible; the Klitschkos would definitely present an obstacle, but Johnson would jump over it - he showed how he would against Willard and while you may feel encouraged to retort to that analogy, simply put, Johnson was not the fighter he once was at that point. Some fans are missing the point. Johnson would not have to pull rabbits out of the hat to overcome the bigger men - he was very tough and could fight like a dog. He would attack the Kiltschko's in combination and smooth over their rangy work with his superior fighting brain.
Byrd beat a prime Tua, and a slightly past his prime Holyfield. By the time Byrd fought Povtkin, he was past his best. Ibeabuchi vs Byrd was 2-2 on my card before Ike caught Byrd with a HUGE left hook. Byrd was not fat as a heavyweight. He was in good shape at 210 or so.
LOL, no, Ketchel did not hit as hard as Fitz or Choyshki. Can you show me one souce that says so? Fitz and Choyski sparked heavies. Ketchel was almost always a middle weight. While Ketchel power at middle weight was good, he never proved it at heavy. Choysnki and Fitz did.
Are you for real? Brewster certainly hits harder than Ketchel. In fact, Brewster is a top 50 all time puncher at heavy.