The argument that American Heavies are "in other sports"

I agree with that intial post. I think you're pretty much spot on, but I just hate this logic of picking out a top class, big NFL player and assuming he could make it as a fighter. It shows complete ignorance.

America still produces some warrior fighters but I don't think there can be any doubt that the number of those warriors is dwindling.So many elite fighters just lack genuine warrior heart - We're taking about over 50% at least. That's pretty shocking.

 

Chris Byrd
Lennox Lewis
Lamon Brewster
Corrie Sanders
Ross Purity

Answer daily double!

 

Math was not your strong subject? It doesn't make sense because you don't know anything about the American sports landscape. Any big man who has an ounce of athletic ability is in the NFL or NBA. The rest are cast offs no matter how many of them there are.

 

Randy Turpin is barely an ATG if he gets in at all. And Joe Calzaghe is not an ATG. fail.

 

Ali was a great athlete. He was 6'4 220 and had better and lighter footwork then most lightweights. What the hell are you talking about son? He used nothing but upper body movement and incredible speed to dodge punches. Just wow. :rofl

Some of the best upper body movement seen in boxing history.

Tyson was probably the most agile heavyweight in history other then Ali. In his prime he was insanely fast and insanely quick on his feet. He would have destroyed as an NFL linebacker. Again fail.

In Joe Louis era, the 40's he was easily the greatest athlete in America, football, baseball whatever he was the most talented bar none.

They were all exceptional athletes. Jesus watch a goddamn Tyson training video.

 

I think your post says it all.

Don't forget that the other countries don't have American football leagues which take up most of our big men

 

Wrestling, gymnastics? And you lost to china on last Olympics.
Your athletes dominates only because of your lobby dispatch opponents through politics and doping scandals. And you always have biggest delegation.

 

Just out of interest, are any Americans really aware of how football/soccer is totally and utterly dominant in the UK, far more so than any one particular sport in the USA is. If anything Britain should be producing less fighters around the 140-190lbs mark because all our best athletes of that weight go into soccer if this logic is applied?

 

And none of that sport exist elsewhere? You say that like boxing is top sport here. Well, its not. In fact we have much less people participating in boxing.
If there where no klitschkos right now there would be no shitty division.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

I can't help but think about guys with unique and physics defying abilities for their size. At 6'9 and 290lbs, Glen 'Big Baby' Davis has the speed to run with most small forwards and the bulk to body slam Shaq which he's actually done as a highschooler.

You gotta ask yourself what a guy like Davis could do inside a ring, he'd run circles around any heavyweight.

 

That's pretty much the state of the game period, though. I won't try and add percentages by country of who has a sack or not, that's just silly.

MichiganWarrior had great points about what you were saying about the athleticism of the great heavies. Ali was obviously a great athlete in terms of speed, and if you need evidence of his physical strength look at him in the clinches. Frazier was plenty agile, he had good footwork and ring cutting. He wasn't as fleet of foot as Tyson or Dempsey, but how many great HW swarmers are there period?

As for Louis not having fast feet, wrong again. In the amateurs he danced around a lot. When Blackburn picked him up he forced him to fight with the slow, balanced pressure boxer-punching style you see in the videos. His style was intentional, meant to make the best use of his punching power by having him plant his feet and punch deliberately, perfectly with every punch. The result was the most fundamentally flawless heavyweight ever.

 

America - best athletes play basketball, football (pigskin), and some would argue baseball.

W. Europe (including the UK) - best athletes play football, rugby, tennis.

E. Europe (including Russia) - best athletes play hockey, football, tennis.

L. America - best athletes play football, tennis (argentina - rugby, brazil - mma).

*ignoring Africa (football), Australia, NZ (rugby, aussie rules), E. Asia (football).

Hypo 1: America's best bigs are playing other sports which explains lesser dominance in the 2-3 highest weight divisions.

Counterargument 1: The other regions have sports made for bigs which pull just as many athletes away from boxing. LA (except for Argentina and Brazil) doesn't have a great sport for bigs, but they generally don't have many big people anyway.

Counterargument 2: The loss of America's prestige in the big heavyweight divisions coincided with the dismantling of the cold war.

Hypo 2: America is the only region in the world that has very little alternative for average sized athletes (light heavyweight and below) which is why they do much better in those division. In other words, if you're a regular sized guy in America (e.g. 90% of population) you stand very little chance in sports other than boxing (changing with MMA and increasing popularity of football) whereas in the other regions you would never consider boxing as the first option.

Counterargument?

 

Intrestingly the number of british proffesional boxers has stayed pretty static over the last 50 years and has if anything gone up slightly .