Usyk and Crawford have demolished the bigger is better argument (historical significance)

Leonard done this decades ago moving up to middleweight in his first fight after retiring for 3 years an beating Hagler

 

Also true and agreed. Perhaps the word "relatively" is what was omitted from my post. I wasn't really putting a case for a middleweight from the 1900s making an impression in today's division (or anything similar).

There has been a baseline shift in heavyweight size over the decades.

Hence, my reference to an era of SHW dominance, which was never seen before by those who watched heavyweight boxing in the '60s and '70s and all that was seen by those who started watching boxing from around the mid-to-late 90s onward.

Perception is reality.

It is, therefore, understandable how the modern fanbase might have perceived a 'Great Heavyweight' as a giant. But now an ostensible giant slayer has come about to upend that perception.

Usyk has now become the Ubermensch, but what feels like an upset is simply the latest turn of the wheel in the continuum.

 

To a small extent.

 

bigger isn't automatically better.

it helps a lot.

 

Size is just one of various factors that can help a fighter win.

Technique
Timing
Accuracy
Speed
Power
Chin
Stamina
Footwork
Ring IQ

These are all things that can help a fighter win, but no one wins relying on just one of those things. The same is true of size whether its height, reach, weight, or all of the above.

But if someone has decent power, skill, stamina, etc to go along with a significant size advantage, that can go a long way. Especially if they know how to use their size to their advantage.

 

Your argument would be valid if Usyk came into the ring at the cruiserweight limit 200lbs and Crawford came in at147lbs ,but since both added weight to compete in higher divisions,it isn't !

As far as heavyweights go
Moore
Charles
Ellis
Moorer
M Spinks
Byrd
Holyfield
Haye
Adamek
Toney
Jones Jnr
Usyk

All added weight to be able to compete with the bigger guys.
If that had not been necessary they would not have done so.
Usyk is 6 ft 3 in and 227lbs.
That's bigger than Baer,Liston,Ali,Holmes.
Apart from Willard and Carnera, whose success was entirely due to their size , which heavyweight champions,before Bowe in1992 , were bigger than Usyk?

 

It wasn't a loss but it was a terribly close 10 round win.
You're right, of course, that indicates Fury was completely washed. I don't see why more people can't see it. And there's a good chance that 'win' will go down as the last win of his career.

 

If size didn’t matter there would be no need for weight divisions.

 

Smaller men beating bigger men has been happening since the dawn of the sport. The question isn’t “ if “ it can happen but “ how often “ and BY whom TO whom ? Joe Louis was 6’1”, 196 lbs and only in the pros 11 months when he annihilated the 6’5” 260 lb former champion Carnera. That was just one of many examples. But historically is this the norm ? How many men did Lennox Lewis, Vitali, Klitschko and Wladimir Klitschko face who were smaller than them and how many did they lose to ? A few yes. Was it most ? Not even close.

 

Usyk, yes. Not here in Classic, since Ali, Holmes etc have always had a very high h2h standing here. But outside Classic that probably wasn't the case so much.

Crawford, though, proved nothing that Pac and Mayweather hadn't already. They gave up huge amounts of weight in the ring, while Crawford probably has been the bigger guy in most instances and wasn't even that much smaller against Canelo. Also, for any of this to truly prove anything about size, we'd have to scrap weigh-ins. As of now being the bigger guy in the ring comes with the price of having to cut more, except at HW of course.

 

Yes. Ironically, Crawford's p4p achievement isn't beating naturally bigger men, but rather boiling down to weight classes a guy his size normally doesn't touch.

It's more comparable to if Mayweather had gone from 118 lbs to 140 instead of to what he actually did (130 to 154).