Marciano's Body Frame could easily be Tua and Tyson

Yes, he did.
I don't think being 226 instead of 210 or 206 hurt his performance, or aided it much either.
That's the point.

 

Yeah and half of those were soft pitter-patter punches to the body...

 

Do they have Specsavers up there amongst all the tripe, and smog?

Go to page 12 in the thread, post number 192, and you will see a link to a pic of Tua on the scales.

Then come back with your garbage opinions.

 

You need more than Specsavers you Southern Softie if you don't think Tua was fat, how's about using two jam jars.....:rofl:rofl

 

:deal

 

http://a-j-s-boom-boom-room.2299399.n4.nabble.com/file/n4659114/tua300_121017708_174g7i2-174g7ik.jpg

 

Muscularity at its best....

 

He's not fat, he's "big boned"..

 

This is basically what his detractors are arguing!

 

Lets look at what you are saying here.

Guys like Michael Spinks bulked up from the current super middleweight limit, to 200lbs or thereabouts, and this is hailed as an advance in sorts science.

Presumably this did not make him worse against the bigger guys, or did it?

Yet despite all these advances in sports science, Marciano could not have gained significant muscle weight, without becoming a basket case.

You can't have it both ways!

 

Don't be dense. Mike was 6 - 3 1/2 with 77 inch reach. He had a lot more length on which to build mass. Rocky had primarily torso to go along with his TRex arms and Dachshund legs. He'd look and move like a bowling ball.

Besides, I didn't think size mattered so why would he want to put on an ounce?