When is a fighter the bigger man?

the frame... tyson weighed 221 pounds packed of muscle in 5'10 of height vs berbick, and foreman weighed 217 against frazier(1) in 6'4 of height, still he was much bigger than tyson, the frame is the key

 

GGG and Brook are about equal size. Brook is about 10 pounds heavier, GGG an inch taller.

Brook is younger and does more extreme weight cutting to fight at Welter limit.

Thats the truth of the matter. It was comical to see Kellerman trying to sell Brook as the smaller man when he was heavier in lean muscle and almost equal in height.

 

what?

 

what do you mean what?

 

I don't believe these garbage lines. What about a 175 pounds 6'4" fighter? A light-heavyweight is
bigger than a 221 lbs heavyweight by your logic.
Or.
Spinks was taller than Tyson but lots of Tyson hater underestimate Tyson's Spinks win saying Tyson beat
a former light-heavyweight small fighter.
Or the double standard reigns here.

 

It's a point I've made previously

Weight is a variable, like everything else.

The person who's a bigger man today could well be the smaller man tomorrow.

Pacquiao would be considered the bigger man against Crawford, yet Pacquiao started boxing as a Flyweight.

 

I think one of the last official weigh ins had Brock at 178 and GGG at 168. On fight night it might have been closer, but these guys are really about the same size. Brock as a welter was rehydrating to about 165 to 170, Hearn himself said this. GGG barely adds anything after hydration and as a middle comes in under 170. Their height and wing span is near equal...its comical to call Brook smaller and claim size was a factor between equally sized men.

 

I heard muscle was actually heavier than fat.

A fighters natural frame/robustness+weight determines whos bigger. Even if youre a few lbs lighter, if youre several inchs taller with a much longer wingspan and your weight mostly comes from lean/and or compact muscle youre bigger.

 

So who's bigger Hearns or Hagler?