why were there no tall heavyweights......

[K-DOGG]

Ok some reasons.

1/ People were on average shorter in the past of course so they were fewer and farer between the giants and the population was also smaller too.

2/ In the interwar and post war years the gene pool had been limited, all the physically able men were killed at war leaving diminutive specimens like Moore, Marciano, Walcott, Charles etc to prevail.

3/ Taller boxers in the past like Abe Simon, Buddy Baer, Primo Carnera etc were not subject to the same modern specific training as giant boxers are today. They did not acquire the balance necessary to become a technical boxer like Lewis, Klitschko or even like Grant or Fury. They were absolute oafs and could be beaten by much smaller guys like Louis!

Historically 6'2" average was optimum for a HW boxer. It is only in the last 20 years that 6'5"-6'7" has become regarded as the more desirable.

Very articulate post.

But, I would still take a good 6'2", 225 Lb well schooled fighter over any of the giants today. Smaller men, if they are schooled well, statistically do better, despite that good big man vs good little man cliché used in the lower weight classes. Any man over 200 lbs has a good punch and the faster its delivered, the more effective it is.

A man's chin doesn't know he weighs 245/255. And while leverage could be an issue as far as a shorter man reaching up, there's a whole lot more body to pound on a 6'6" guy.....and, odds are, he's not going to be as good on the inside. There is such a thing as too big.

[jackson8]

Back then tall people were awkward and clumsy, that all changed when steroids came around. This explains many of todays heavyweight giants and their success.

[Tommo1]

I agree that a pressure/inside fighter like Tyson of far shorter size and a brawler type like Holyfield or Ike Ibeabuchi or Tommy Morrison (save the chin) etc. or counterpunchers like Haye who are all incidentally around 6'2" have great chances at success against the giants who the only truly successful and tested examples are Lewis and Wladimir and to a lesser extent Vitali and Bowe. My point was before the 80's there really weren't any skilled giants.

I think the man just above may also have a contributing factor. Steroids are a factor here to stay at top level sport unfortunately and boxing is not an exception!

[violaandme]

Bill Rustle 6'9" tall born 1939=Uncoordinated hahahahahahahahaha
I might have to go back and see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AlFrOj5Mc

or you could see for yourself

Oscar Robertson 6'5" born 1938 = clumsy

Dr J 6'7" born 1950 = trips over his own feet when he walks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DebtVv87jDc

Maybe he took roids who knows

[violaandme]

wilt chamberlin was so mechanical in his movements
hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah
did I mention he was seven feet tall

[Earl-Hickey]

Historically 6'2" average was optimum for a HW boxer. It is only in the last 20 years that 6'5"-6'7" has become regarded as the more desirable.

Don't really know how true that is, as most of the shorter heavyweights today fight the wrong style, someone like eddie chambers etc fighting on the outside is ridiculous

Now Chisora fights the right way for a shorter heavyweight, he beat up helenius and gave Vitali a few things to think about, now imagine a much faster, stronger, much harder hitting chisora and you have a fighter that can give klitschkos serious problems

it's about styles as much as size

Joe Frazier was small even in his day but he made it work for him



As did tyson

[violaandme]

now I'm not saying Bill Rustle or the rest would make good boxers but to say tall people need steroids to be coordinated is a joke most tall people grow out of any uncoordination by their late teens
I agree there is an optimal range of height for heavyweights probably 5'10" -6'4" give or take but its more about training for your abilities and knowing what you can and can't do

[LacedUp]

Basically because there were not a lot of 6'6 people walking around in those days.

Wow, evolution must really has taken steroids the last 100 years huh?

Reason is that there's simply not a lot of guys with that size who happen to be athletic and have the right mental attitude etc. And its not as if every other boxer these days have that height.

Boxing is much more known nowadays, as you have a lot of the Eastern Europeans and Russians fighting and they are big guys.

But they were also big back then.

[Tommo1]

Earl Hickey;

I am glad you said that because I have always been of the opinion that a shorter but powerfully built pressure fighter would be the most dangerous type to beat the giants. As seen with Sam Peter vs Wladimir Klitschko. My vision is of a prime Tyson like figure with the build, the power/chin and the speed accuracy and defence that Tyson had (relative to weight of course) but be around 6'2" and 230lbs prime! I think Wlad/Lennox would be toast! I am always scouting for such a body type and style of fighter in the hopes of finding the future "super Tyson" but as yet no avail!

Viola;

Steroids do not increase coordination, agreed lol.

Training, increases balance and coordination.

And you're right for an outfighter a taller frame is ideal and of course an infighter would want a shorter frame. It's about the style! The taller a fighter gets the harder it is to develop the balance required to carry yourself as a fighter effectively.

[Cardinal Buck]

If you were 6'6 back then, you could earn a better living as a carnival side show act.