If we were to take the likes of Dempsey, Louis and Marciano and put them into today's age: 1) How much bigger would they be? 2) How would it affect their style? :bbb
Demspey and Marciano would probably be trianed down, or trained up slightly. People freak out when you say it, but it's probably that both would be light-heavyweights at least when turning pro. Louis, would probably be a "bigger" 200lbs early on, and then they'd see. All styles unaffected.
1. In their era these fighters were great and they could beat heavier fighters( Louis-Carnera,Dempsey-Willard) Lots of athlete -including fighters- were very muscular before the "modern" era. The muscle mass is nothing to do with the "modern era". The "modern era" sucks lots of fighter are fat or abnormal tall this is the reason of the bigger bodyweights. 2. The big weight never was a goal. Better question what's a fighter's ideal weight ? Wilder was very skinny but he could beat the fat and heavier Stiverne.This proves the bigger weight isn't so important. 3. Trust in me ! A talented fighter with a good trainer can find his ideal weight.:bbb
Even though many heavyweights today could also weigh as light as classic sized heavyweights the possibility of training down would be ruled out because the money has always been in the heavyweight division. Same with Dempsey, Louis and co. David Tua was 201lb for his debut and was not stick thin. I think there will be a change of opinion in weight soon. Wilder is proof that it is unnecessary to develop so much mass so long as his arms are long enough to make the advantage he has. The present heavyweight division remains the only weight class where height and reach is rarely overcome by a shorter man of the same weight and that is largely to do with pace and skill. The bigger a man gets the less pace he has and skill is restricted. It does not stop them reaching the same conclusion but IMO it makes for different fights and a different division. In past times pace and skill was more important to heavyweights than size. But it could change. I think the classic sized heavyweights who trained under traditional methods were a size and weight that they were because they trained under traditional methods. Today they would weigh more but a lot of the skills they had were developed against a division of faster heavyweights so some of what they had could be reduced as with their pace. Would they hit harder? Perhaps a tad but they would fare better mauling with heavier men inside. So yes, they would be bigger and it would effect their style in just the same way as the size and style of men in this weight class has also been effected.
Good point! Do you think the likes of a Dempsey and Louis had what it takes in this modern game to stop all this jabbing n' grabbing?
Hard to say with any degree of certainty. Their options would include bulking up, and training down, and it is by no means certain that the ideal strategy would be chosen. The wrong trainer could have ruined any of them. Given the twelve round limit, they would have likely all come into the ring a little heavier, even if they were fighting in a lower weight class. I think that a sensible approach might be to keep Dempsey and Marciano under 210lbs, and Louis under 225lbs. Under those numbers you could add something without loosing much, but beyond that you would have problems.
What you didn't mention was putting all the modern guys BACK to the 20's-30's-40's. Louis, Marciano, etc. would have been bigger, stronger, AND as fast IMHO with modern training and these big 'hulks' now wouldn't have the size and musculature back in the classic days. Even a Patterson born in 1965 (instead of 1935) would have been a 210 pound wrecking ball in the 90's! I repeat...SO difficult to try to compare ERA's...:-(
I would like to think so, but only if they were developed from their own time and brought here as they were then. And proberbly only if they fought with the small 6oz gloves too. (A smaller man needs to land more often as it is and those old gloves made more impression. A big man could be cut up pretty bad by the time he warms up) Born and raised with today's fighters it is conceivable that facing off at the size they were then against bigger men they would in deed be at a disadvantage. Even if they were that bit bigger second time around. So much of what made them what they were had to do with the environment, training, championship distance and gloves of their day. Likewise, I think some fighters today would be better suited under the old school conditions and others of whom are successful today would have fared worse back then.
I don't think that either Louis or Marciano inherently had to be great, either in their own time or another. They are very much cases of the right fighter meeting the right trainer.
Yes that is another good point. The right set of circumstances also includes the trainer to get the most out of the fighter and the time and money to select the right path. One component missing and perhaps a different career for any great fighter would be achieved. I think the makings of a great fighter would be there to begin with for all of them when ever they were born... but having the makings and realising it? Well at any one time the world must have quite a few fighters start out with the makings of something great but they never realise it also. Perhaps with the right set of circumstances there is room for an exceptional fighter being both an exception to the rule... and exceptionally fortunate to find the right set of circumstances.
Of the three of them, Dempsey was probably the guy who was always going to find greatness, because he was such a natural fighter. I think that any half way competent trainer would have done something with him.
