Superheavyweights...

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by cross_trainer, Oct 24, 2009.


  1. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,366
    25,795
    Jan 3, 2007
    True, but a large portion of our population consists of Asians, Hispanics, Females and Children. Without doing a real search, I'm guessing that most of the Eastern Euro countries have a greater percentage of taller people, due to less diversity. That, and I think they tend to get bigger in general.
     
  2. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    All good points. People seem to pretend as if the NFL/NBA didn't exist in the 80's/90's. The lacking popularity of boxing is what is draining the American talent, not other sports.

    Especially in case of the NBA i don't understand the argument. The average height of a basketball pro is 6'7, but most good ones are far taller than that. And if history tells us anything, it's that 99% of great boxers are shorter than or equal to 6'7" in height... in other words, the basketball players were not likely to be great boxers anyway.


    And where did i say 15lbs of flap was a good thing?

    I merely pointed out that saying "Chambers is better now that he lost the extra bulk" is a misrepresentation of the truth, which is that he's better without the extra fat. At 210lbs like he is now, he is already bulked up.
     
  3. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,580
    Nov 24, 2005
    I think a great 190 pound fighter could still compete well with any size heavyweight, but for most men that size and around 6' it would be possible to put on 20 pounds and actually be an even better fighter at 210.

    So, there are a lot of "cruiserweights" doing the right thing by increasing muscle mass. But there are also far too many heavyweights who need to LOSE weight.

    Almost all of the great heavyweights were 200-220 pounds.
    Of the lighter ones, Rocky Marciano is probably one of the few who maybe would NOT have benefitted from increasing his weight, because at 186 pounds he looked quite stocky, had a lot of weight in his legs.
    The slimmer-built Dempsey would probably do better bulking to a muscular 205 - 210, as Holyfield did.
    Ezzard Charles could have benefitted too from bulking up. But not necessarily Walcott, who's upper-body was built strong enough, and used his light legs to waltz around pretty well.
     
  4. KTFO

    KTFO Guest

    Evolution and Roids are two pairs of shoes.
     
  5. Bill1234

    Bill1234 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,314
    499
    Jan 28, 2007
    I'm saying that the majority of heavyweights today have extra flab and bulk that weigh them down. The extra muscle is just as bad as the extra flab. It isn't i coincidence that the fighters who focus on bulking up an extra 20-30lbs in muscle get tired more quickly, are slower, and may not even hit harder or get much stronger. It also isn't a coincidence that the fighters who are in shape year round aren't all huge and bulky.

    This era seems to care more about how big and muscular they are rather than how conditioned they are.
     
  6. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,355
    Jun 29, 2007
    Most of the eastern euro top level guys are big and in shape. Its the USA based and Cuban based heavies that are packing on the pounds.

    I hear what you are saying though. I do believe there is such a thing as best fighting weight. The things is if your giving up 30+ pounds, you might have to add a few yourself.
     
  7. Bill1234

    Bill1234 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,314
    499
    Jan 28, 2007
    If you're not gaining anythign but weight from it, why should you do it? Yes, a lot of the eastern euro top level guys are big and in shape, but they don't focus on bulking up, many of them are in shape year round, and get into fighting shape when they train for a fight. There is a massive difference between in shape and in fighting shape.
     
  8. Jaws

    Jaws Active Member Full Member

    652
    7
    Mar 13, 2009
    I agree. In boxing, bulking up is not always a good thing, and there quickly becomes a point where it hinders instead of helps. Punching power is more a result of physics, angles, and form. You either have it or you don't. There quickly becomes a point where extra muscle is just going to slow you down and tire you out. Just look at Frank Bruno.

    And while I agree the NBA is not a pull on boxing talent, it's hard to say what the effect of football is having. Football is far more popular now than it has ever been. The NFL is dominating all of sports like never before. So how many kids are pursuing football careers instead of boxing these days? Boxing isn't glamorous, and it requires FAR harder training. It isn't accessible in schools (like football is), and there is no one for kids to emulate these days.

    I see today's heavyweights relying more on size than ever before. They have more limited punching skillsets---you hardly ever see them using uppercuts anymore.
     
  9. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    62,283
    47,340
    Feb 11, 2005
    Yeah, think more of a fastball pitcher, Pedro Martinez than weight lifter.

    In regards to the NFL, thousands of guys' careers are over at 18 or 22, which is plenty young enough to start a career as a heavyweight boxer. The problem is there are so few good gyms in the US. And it's a ****ing tough row to hoe.
     
  10. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,355
    Jun 29, 2007
    Some universities big on college football also have boxing clubs. Notre Dame, USC, and Michigan State come to mind. Since less than 2% of college athletes are good enough to play in the NFL, boxing is there for them to try.
     
  11. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    The lack of gyms and quality trainers really is one of the biggest problems.
     
  12. JIm Broughton

    JIm Broughton Active Member Full Member

    772
    22
    Feb 24, 2007
    I think it's it's a well understood fact that athletes are generally bigger now than in the past just as the general populatiopn is. Look at the size(s) of Basketball, Football and even Hockey players today compared to those of yesteryear. Look at the athleticism demonstrated by todays athlete in all sports. Records fall like autumn leaves nowadays which is why we probably won't see anymore HW champions the size of Marciano or Dempsey or Louis again. What we COULD see however is a better conditioned species of heavyweight fighter IF boxing brings back 2 things,,,,The first is 15 rounds for a championship fight. That would eliminate the big but flabby heavy we see all too much of today. The second is ONE champion in each division. Boxing is too watered down. 3 champions in the HW division can enable a big halfway decently skilled fighter to capture a version of the title and avoid fighting another "champion" thus getting away with lax training methods and fighting bums to keep his "title" for aas long as he can. One more thing....There's WAY too much money in the game today. Fighting once every two years and pocketing 20 million is not the recipe for a well conditioned fighting champion. Pride has gone out the window...It's all about the money. Let's go back to the way thing's used to be and we'll see a champion who is in shape, fighting more regularly and is proud to be called the one true Heavyweight Champion of the World.