The myth of superheavyweight dominance

Maybe at 7'2" the size does indeed become a disadvantage but from 6'5" to 6'8" I really don't see this being the case. I mean just look at Helenius, the guy has absolutely 0 skill yet he manages to climb to the top of the rankings (currently ranked #4). And it is not necessarily because of how bad the division is because there are plenty more skilled fighters than him that are smaller.

 

Wladimir already proved that size does not win fights. He got KO´d 3 times.

 

the last 20 years have basically been dominated by Bowe/Lewis and the Klitschkos.

The era opf the superheavyweight is here.

Liston was bigger than nearly all his competition. Joe Louis had at least 10 lbs on nearly all his opponents. Jack Johnson was considered a monster in his era.

Size be it height or weight has always given people a distinct advantage.

No need to be a FAR better boxer than your opponent to overcome a size differential.

 

:good
Ali too was much bigger as most of his opponents...

The HW division should be all about the big men, like it has always been.
People are getting bigger, and I for one would look at the division with a completely different view as the champion was a 5' 10" midget or something.
It's the Heavyweight division, they're supposed to be BIG!
Big in the 60's was something completely different as big right now.

 

I agree with you on this. Being 7 foot tall must be ****ing hard to pin down a slippery opponent. Punching down on a smaller technically sound opponent would leave you looking stupid.

I think Vitali's awkwardness holds him back some times he looks cumbersome and a bit ragged but at his size co-ordination must be hard.

Then there are guys like Sugar Niko who looked hilarious at times against Holyfield, Ruiz, Haye etc.

 

Valuev was befuddled by anything that moved laterally, but he damn near broke Marciano's record

 

Anyone on here who is tall and has sparred shorter men know what hell it can be when the shorter man is capable of using it to his advantage.

 

I think ability is more important then size alone, but if you get a big man with the same ability as a smaller boxer the bigger boxer will win more often then not.

Great boxing ability should turn up more often at a weight in and around where most of the population weighs. The great heavyweights have been bigger then most men during their time of dominance. Chances are there have been smaller boxers with more ability but they just are not big enough.

Have all these big men which are more rare then smaller men been lucky to have more boxing ability these last 100 years? I think it takes a rare blend of ability and size to be a great heavyweight.

 

I sparred my buddy today, 6 foot 6 and 16 Stone, to my 5 foot 11 and 11 Stone.

He caught me cleanly twice, and knocked me down both times.

 

you listed classic heavys as quickest, skilled, and most powerful

but Wlad is very fast for his size, very skilled and hits very hard

he could easily crack the hardest hitters list

factor in his size plus speed and his improved defense and he doesnt have use a lot of effort to get out of range

Vitali is big and skilled enough that he can make himself impossible to hit

Valuev was a big super heavy who wasnt gifted and he was only a challenge cause of his size and some what knew how to use it

super heavyweights dominate when they are big and can box, just a big guy with gloves on wont dominate much

 

Jack's not a K brothers fan :-(

Surely you can appreciate them? I don't like Khan but I appreciate him

 

Neither can really throw uppercuts. Wlad can't fight inside whatsoever which is why a bob and weaving pressure fighter like Tyson would knock the **** out of him early.