Which of the following fighters are "SuperHeavyWeight?"

I've been here for a bit more than 10 years, but must have missed this "consensus". I personally certainly wouldn't rule that out, even though I suspect things will continue for the most part as they have for the last 20 years - where Lewis and the Klits have dominated, and Joshua and Fury stand as the best currently. All big guys any way you measure it.

Wilder, whether one deems him a SHW or not, certainly isn't anywhere close to being an "elite HW champion" yet. He's a title holder with a padded recorded who should have lost his title on good cards. That's where he stands at present.

And now a question for you - do you consider Duran and Hopkins to be the same size? Is Toney Vitaly's size?

 

People said that here in Classic? I certainly can't remember it to be any kind of consensus. I'd say Ali generally has been deemed as the top h2h HW - but not the 225-230 lbs version of him.

Saying that Wilder is bigger than, say, Toney is pretty consistent with saying that Hearns is bigger than Duran or Foster bigger than McCallum, and I never felt that the last two statements ever been controversial here. Now, the first one seems to be, though.

 

There has absolutely been comments made in here about guys of certain weights not being competitive nowadays and won't be seen again. I've seen comments made talking around 225 from memory. Now i would never say there was a "consensus" but there was some support for sure.

Wilder is much bigger than Toney. At the end of the day Toney was extremely comfortable at middleweight or Super Middleweight and could have been for much longer with dedication and a desire to fight there.

Hearns is bigger than Duran as he was a natural Welter/Junior Middle and Duran a lightweight.

Foster is bigger than McCallum as he was a natural 154 and Foster a natural 175.

Those are basic to me.

 

As Bill said. "Much Ado About Nothing"

 

QUOTE="Bokaj, post: 19710221, member: 25264"]People said that here in Classic? I certainly can't remember it to be any kind of consensus. I'd say Ali generally has been deemed as the top h2h HW - but not the 225-230 lbs version of him.

Saying that Wilder is bigger than, say, Toney is pretty consistent with saying that Hearns is bigger than Duran or Foster bigger than McCallum, and I never felt that the last two statements ever been controversial here. Now, the first one seems to be, though.[/QUOTE]
I've been here 13 years and I can't remember anyone making that pronouncement and stipulation.I do know Seamus and others said, where are the 5'10"stumpy armed slowish 185lbs men challeging for supremacy in the heavyweight division? And he was quite right to pose that question because they have been totally absent!
ps Reznick had only been here ten years less a few days so his,
"about a decade," means from the time he joined us till today!
Which is BS!

 

Yeah, one or two posters have probably said something to that effect, but most here have guys like Ali, Tyson and, but perhaps to a lesser extent, Louis as some of the most dangerous ever h2h.

I just get a bit annoyed with Reznick's whining to the effect that most posters would draw an absolute line at a weight of about 220 lbs. That's just not true. There is one poster I've seen in recent years that might say something to that effect, but no one else I think. Reznick's whining stems, I think, from being angry with the actual near consensus that Tyson would beat Marciano.

In total agreement.

 

I've been here 13 years and I can't remember anyone making that pronouncement and stipulation.I do know Seamus and others said, where are the 5'10"stumpy armed slowish 185lbs men challeging for supremacy in the heavyweight division? And he was quite right to pose that question because they have been totally absent!
ps Reznick had only been here ten years less a few days so his,
"about a decade," means from the time he joined us till today!
Which is BS![/QUOTE]

Yeah, it's a bit annoying. If polls were put up about AJ-Ali or AJ-Tyson here, I'm pretty sure AJ wouldn't get the majority of votes.

 

Of those in the list Lennox and Joshua are the only SHWs. Carnera had the size but not the overall athleticism or skillset. Wilder is tall but he's lighter than many "regular' HWs of the past. Might as well say Paul Williams was a cruiserweight if you're going down that road. The others were either regular sized HWs who were overweight at the time they were listed, or just regular sized HWs period.

 

Do light-heavyweights exist relative to welterweights? Do flyweights exist relative to middleweights?

The fact that there isn't a man-made dividing line between fighters that operate above 200lbs doesn't mean that a fight between 205lbs Steve Cunningham and 250lbs Anthony Joshua isn't a physical mismatch.

 

Natural weight is not a black and white concept. Most greats below HW have had success is several weight classes and moved up naturally as they got heavier with age, so it's hard to point to an absolute natural weight. The best definition imo would probably be the weight the fighter looked best at and that he could stay at for some time. I e not boiling down 20-25 lbs for a fight or two. There will grey areas with this definition, yes, but it works pretty well in general I'd say.

 

Certainly wasn't big numbers but some have stated these things.

 

https://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/...erne-Wilder-Tale-of-the-Tape.jpg&action=click

 

Well, for you size is apparently only about weight. Even if a lot of that weight is fat. I'm 6 foot and 150 lbs in good shape, but of course I can east myself up to 250 lbs. According to your and Reznick's criteria, that would make me Joshua's size, but most others here think that's not a very good definition of size.

Wilder is a big HW in terms of height and reach but not in terms of weight. Those kind of proportions are rare in top fighters and having those kind of proportions and devastating power are rarer still. But it happens. One previous example is Hearns at 6'1 that had a devastating punch at around 150 lbs. It doesn't come along very often and probably will be a while until the next one, but it obviously happens. So I don't see what all the fuss is about.

 

Neck18"
Bicep16"
Forearm15"
Fist13"
Chest 42" ex 44"
Isn't skinny it's the height that gives that impression

 

You thought a fat Toney was the same size as Peter, so obviously you're only interested in weight.

I think weight while in shape is the best measurement of size, but probably not the only.

I for example don't think that Wilder would be very useful on enlightening me on how Frazier, who wasnt very far off in terms of weight, would do today. The huge disparity in height would make the comparison pretty useless.