No boxer shorter than 6 foot 4 inches would be favorite to beat modern super heavyweights

Ernie Terrel was 6ft 6, but he weighed 210 pounds, sometimes 200 pounds. Buster Matthis weighed 243 pounds and was 6ft 3" and was fat and overweight.

Top 20 Heavyweights of the 1960s
Muhammad Ali 6ft 2" 210 pounds
Sonny Liston 6ft 1" 218 pounds
Joe Frazier 5ft 11" 205 pounds
Floyd Patterson 6ft 1" 190 pounds
Zory Folley 6ft 1" 203 pounds
Eddie Machen 6ft 196 pounds
Jimmy Ellis 6ft 1" 196 pounds
Jerry Quarry 6ft 1" 196 pounds
Oscar Bonevena 6ft 205 pounds
Clevland William 6ft 3 215 pounds
Henry Cooper 6ft 186 pounds
Leotis Mattis 6ft 199 pounds
Karl Mildenburger 6ft 196 pounds
Doug Jones 6ft 188 pounds
George Chuvalo 6ft 216 pounds
Thad Spencer 5ft 11" 193 pounds
Ingemar Johannsson 6ft" 194 pounds
Amas Lincoln 6ft 204 pounds

Not only could these boxers have made Cruiserweight, but they even fought under the Cruiserweight weight limit.

George Foreman turned pro in 1969 and weighed 230 pounds, and was known as a "giant". That's why he was called "Big George Foreman" and towered over everyone except Jon Tate and Joe Bugner.

You're right, The moderator of this forum need to ban people for making stupid comments or just trolling the forum. I totally agree. The irony. Like I said, most pre modern heavyweights would not survive in the modern era and would be fighting at Cruiserweight.

 

Cute, then explain how the 6'2 Lamon Brewster, 6'3 Ross Purrity and 6'3 Corrie Sanders knock out Wlad?

 

Lol you named fighters from the 1960's kid not that 1970s' 80's and 90s Even then you picked and choose which person to add.

George Foreman was never considered a giant. As I said various guys as I already named were taller and weighed more than Foreman. You flat out ignored Ron Lyle, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes, Gerry Quarry, Al Jones, Leroy Jones, Buster Mathis Sr, and the other 30 plus guys I named who were at least 6'3 just to try to prove your sad misinformed point.

Buster Mathis was fat? Yeah because clearly Tyson Fury, Ortiz, Dillian Whyte, Jarrell Miller, Andy Ruiz Jr aren't fat right? Also I thought you were talking about height? Now you are talking about weight? So which is it?

How dumb do you have to be to realize most fighters now days are overweight. If you think being 6'3 and 270 makes you a better heavyweight than being 6'3 and 230 then you should give it up. Stop making a fool of yourself .

So like I said basically every contender from the 70's on were between 6'2 and 6'6 just like the fighters are today. The only difference was they were in good shape back in the day.

 

This. I stopped reading at skilled super heavyweights. Joshua is extremely green and would get badly exposed by a ton of past fighters that were under 6'4" and 220 pounds. Parker, who is a below average pressure fighter was pressuring Joshua all fight. If that were a prime David Tua instead of a green Parker Joshua would've been carried out the ring.

Lamont Brewster 6'2" 225 lbs vs. Wlad 6'6" 242 lbs

This content is protected

Brewster destroying a prime Wlad, who is the same size as Joshua, but was way more experienced at the time with a record of 42-2 with almost all his wins coming by knockout.

Evander Holyfield 6'2" 217 lbs vs. Riddick Bowe 6'5" 246 lbs.

This content is protected

Holyfield going to war and beating a Prime Bowe that is just as big as any modern Big man, but was very experienced at 34-0.


Larry Holmes 6'3" 211 lbs vs. Leroy Jones 6'5" 254 lbs.

This content is protected

Larry started slow and eventually beat Jones into submission. Jones had a record of 24 wins and 1 draw.

Bert Cooper 5'11" 230 lbs vs. Derek Williams 6'5" 237 lbs

This content is protected

Bert Beating Derek Williams, who was 18-5.

Oliver McCall 6'2" 231 vs. Lennox Lewis 6'5" 238 lbs.

This content is protected

McCall knocking out Lewis.

 

My original post was about George Foreman being the first real modern heavyweight, and destroying everyone because of his size. Which includes height and weight. He turned pro in the late 60s. So why would I even talk about 90s boxers?

George Foreman was never considered a giant? Ha. You obviously haven't got a clue have you. The reason I gave a list of the 60s, is because you said there were boxers before George Foreman that were bigger before him. There weren't, one taller and skinnier, the other fat and overweight. And I referred to "most heavyweights" pre modern, not "all". Most of the top heavyweights in the 60s were Cruiserweights. And the further back you go, the smaller you get.

And you pretended like there was a huge amount of boxers between 6ft 3 and 6ft 6 and weighing over 230 pounds in the 1970s. Only two boxers fit that category of the 70s and that was Bugner and Tate and they maxed at 230 pounds.

Norton only weighed 215, Larry Holmes actually weighed 213 in the 70s, Jerry Quarry was 6ft 1 and weighed 205 pounds. and Ron Lyle 220 pounds. All small heavyweights by todays standard. Joseph Parker is not a big heavyweight and he is 6ft 4 and weighs 247 pounds of pure muscle and his biggest game is on the inside because of his size, being the smaller man in todays game. Yet, he'd be the biggest heavyweight in the 1970s.

 

You are also only saying that because they dont exist today. Styles make fights homie.

 

Right then you realize I said pretty much every time contender and champion since the 70's was 6'2 to 6'6 and you went and named a bunch of 50's and 60's guys to prove your point.

I just named you 20 to 30 fighters from the 70s who were at least 6'3 inches all. You have to be ******ed kid. You are just picking and choosing your point. Wilder weighed as low as 210. Wladmir weighed as low as 220 as a pro and 207 as a 20 year old amateur. You said Buster Mathis was fat because he was 6'3 and 300 pounds and you are naming fat guys who fight now to prove your points. Make up your mind ******. Also Joseph Parker wouldn't be the bigger heavyweight of the 70's. Humprhey McBride was 6'4 and weighed well over 300 pounds. Leroy Jones was 6'5 and weighed as low as 230 and was as high as 270. Al Jones was 6'6 and was a 230-240 pound guy.

So as I said you are just a ****** or a troll. If you are a troll you are a bad one. If you are ******ed which I will assume you are then you fit in with most people here. You will pick smaller heavyweights of the 70s and then act like every heavyweight today is that size. If I mention heavy fighters back in the 70s you will turn around say they are fat and then turn around and name a fat modern fighter.

If you think Ken Norton, George Foreman, Ron Lyle, Gerry Cooney, Al Jones, Leroy Jones, Larry Holmes, and the other 30 heavyweights I named earlier couldn't come into the ring 30 pounds overweight and have poor stamina then maybe you should just leave this forum.

Fighters back then that era took pride in what they did. They came into the ring in shape. With the exception of Wilder pretty much every heavyweight contender you see today is either using PEDs to bulk up or are just plain fat. But there is no point in trying to explain this to a person who is simple minded as you. You won't be able to see it and will just name something else to try to prove your wrong point.

 

Yeah, I just checked Rings top 10 hws from 40 years ago compared to today. They averaged approximately 2.5 inches shorter than the average hw today.

 

The OP never said it was impossible merely unlikely.
Lennox Lewis,Wlad,Vitali,Tyson Furey,Wilder and AJ just backs up his point that these giants have dominated the HW division.
That they’ve been beat means nothing as their victors never consolidated their wins and held down titles did they?
what is about 10% chance you don’t get?ill bet Tyson was 100/1 in his shock defeat?it does happen but rarely.
Bookies seldom get it wrong and of course anyone can have a bad night but as a rule the OP is spot on and your arguments are based on Wlad lost to so and so doesn’t disprove anything.

 

I like small heavyweights such as Marciano, Tyson, and Holyfield who could beat bigger opponents or even knocked them out. They didn't care how big their opponents were because they knew well how to handle those bigger guys.

 

Tyson would beat the holy crap out of Wilder, Joshua or Parker. He'd struggle a bit with Ortiz, but win. I'm not saying this because I'm an 80's fanboy, he's just a FAR superior fighter to those guys. And Tyson was one hell of a rough, evil determined ******* in his prime...

This content is protected

 

Gassiev and Usyk beat them all.

 

Holyfield beats the **** out of Wilder or Joshua...

 

Also Prime Tyson would chew these dudes body up...modern heavyweights don’t appropriately value legitimate, sharp, body punching.