We're clearly in the era of the superheavyweight. Since the time of Lennox Lewis, we've seen the division dominated by extremely large men of 235 lbs or more and 6'5 or more. Boxing fans usually divide into two larger groups, the first, denying that it means larger hws have any real advantage over smaller hws, or at least denying that it is symptomatic of a natural progression of the sport. The second group acknowledges, at least generally, that boxing is not unique, and that like all sports with tangible results, it is symptomatic of a progression in the sport. Usually this group of fans assumes that the progression derives from 1. increase world population 2. increased effectiveness of training and tactics, etc 3. opening of world market more than ever before to boxing. Or some combination thereof, personally I think all of them are at play. My question derives from the #2 reason, above. 6'3 220 Louis Firpo was much bigger than Jack Dempsey, and was good enough to manage to knock him through the ropes. 6'6 Buddy Baer similarly knocked Joe Louis through the ropes before being stopped. When you look at the tape of many of those fighters of the era, they do look very archaic. Alot of larger fighters were good enough to trouble the more accomplished fighters with rudimentary training and tactics. As boxing trainers would say, they seem to "give up their height" a lot. So, my question, is if Manny Stewart trained Firpo and Baer, would it have made a difference? Would they have become the more dominant champs of the era as opposed to Dempsey and Louis? I'm about 50/50 on it personally, but I think its an intriguing thought that deserves intelligent debate. And when I say intelligent debate, I know its a very controversial idea. If you're in the first group I reference above, that believes size isn't an advantage and or there' no real progress in boxing, feel free to post and say as much, but there's not a lot you can add to the conversation because the question is basically a nonstarter if you believe that. I already know what you're going to say. So just put in your thoughts once but try not to troll the post repeatedly, because it would be interesting to see what people who do believe in boxing's progress think about it.
If bigger men like say Carnera or Buddy Baer learned to have better defense and fluid jabs or a jab in general they would have probably been the hardest guys to beat then.Buddy Baer was having no problem with Louis up until he stopped jabbing,with real training tactics for a big Hw he would have most likely won.I think the modern training where big fighters actually trained properly and became more athletic would certainly have changed the scope.I think it would a=have actually alterered history and the first true big HW for his time who was athletic Ali,would not be the standout fighter he was because many tall athletic guys similar to him would have emerged,such as they did in the 80's. If we are going by ALL size Hw;s then the same has to go for the smaller Hw's and the training in defense also gets a thump up and they also utilize defense and improve footwork to counter the few big HW's of the past so its all speculation,i would say modern training would have favored the big guys then a bit more than the smaller better fighters,though Joe Louis was a natural fighter if he would hope to defeat a Buddy Baer of modern training he would also have to change his style and tighten up on defense,i believe that would make a great fight modern to that of a Holyfield/Bowe for their time.Im using Louis as the measuring stick here as he was outsized a few times but had overall better boxing abilities,so the question is would modern training tweaks for the bigger less skilled fighters matter that much?Yes!
Excellent answer!:good Not sure I 100% agree, but you laid out a great ****ysis and you may be right!
I think they would have fared better but I suspect a lot of today's move towards the "super heavyweights" is also to do with diet and the prosperity of certain countries. As people we have grown from the 1900's and 1930's both in terms of height and weight. Whilst people like Baer, Firpo, Carnera and others would have done much better with modern training they would have been the ouliers. Over the next decade I suspect we'll see more and more of the 6'4-6'8 guys dominating the division. Sure Wladimir it likely to retire soon but that still leaves- Fury (both) Wilder Granat (6'7) Joshua Modugno (6'6) Dinu (6'5) Teper (6'5) Schwarz (6'5) Whyte (6'4) Parker (6'4) Bryan (6'4) Ugonoh (6'4) All of whom are unbeaten and relative young.
I doubt modern training is the reason larger athletes today moves just as well as smaller athletes. The most noticeable example for me is seeing how NBA centers move in the old days vs the players of the same height today. So for the very large boxers of the past you mentioned, their athleticism was lacking because the pool of large people was fewer to find a standout athlete among them compare to today. Also are you saying there are special training design for HW only that would have made a difference?
I get what you are saying now. I don't think it would have made a difference because it's only natural for a larger boxer of any division to take advantage of his height and reach using the jab if he has one. So if Louis won by getting inside on Baer, I feel it could have happened even if Baer was not a HW.
