Dimitrenko's height advantage over Chambers, Williard's over Dempsey

[Freedom2013]

During the fight on Saturday, Max Kellerman was going on about the Klitschkos' size advantage.

Teddy Atlas always brings it up. I see Michael Rosenthal going on about it in the front page story of the Ring website.

But then, if height is so important, why is Tye Fields not a more successful HW?

Why isn't the tallest HW Julius Long champion?

Why did Chambers beat Dimitrenko, who is taller than Wladimir? Why did Dempsey beat Williard?

Is size so important, or is it how you use it?

[bojangles1987]

It's obviously how you use the size. That's why Lennox was so good, and that's why both Klitschkos are so good. They maximize the advantages their height provides against their opponents.

[Freedom2013]

I just found this interesting post on another boxing forum:

So the klitschkos have a size advantage...

Obviously those who use this accusation never felt the urge to check the records of other famous boxers like Ali or Foreman. Because it's actually them who notoriously outweighed their opponents...

name of the fighter and in how many fights the boxer has been out-weighed (in no particular order):

-George Foreman 11% (9 of 81 fights)
-Sonny Liston 18% (10 of 54)
-Joe Louis 22% (16 of 70)
-Vitali Klitschko 27% (12 of 43)
-Lennox Lewis 27% (12 of 44)
-Muhammad Ali 27% (17 of 61)
-Riddick Bowe 31% (14 of 45)
-Ron Lyle 37% (19 of 51)
-Earnie Shavers 37% (34 of 90)
-Joe Frazier 40% (15 of 37)
-Ken Norton 40% (20 of 50)
-Wladimir Klitschko 46% (27 of 50)
-Larry Holmes 46% (35 of 75)
-Mike Tyson 55% (32 of 50)
-Evander Holyfield 81% (45 of 55)

true Fistic Statistic from before the haye/adamek fights.

You know the critics have no arguments left when they are using this old cliche.

[Hayehammer]

Height is a big advanatge if you know how to use it!
Klitschko brothers are the masters at that!
Wladimir had to learn how to fight tall! emanuel steward has done a great job with him even though i thought wladimir looked more exciting before he was trained by steward! but he had to make those changes or he wouldnt be where he is right now! so all power to him! if its effective i would fight the same way all day! i wouldnt care if i was called being boring etc...

[Grinderman]

Originally Posted by Freedom.

During the fight on Saturday, Max Kellerman was going on about the Klitschkos' size advantage.

Teddy Atlas always brings it up. I see Michael Rosenthal going on about it in the front page story of the Ring website.

But then, if height is so important, why is Tye Fields not a more successful HW?

Why isn't the tallest HW Julius Long champion?

Why did Chambers beat Dimitrenko, who is taller than Wladimir? Why did Dempsey beat Williard?

Is size so important, or is it how you use it?

For that matter, why did Adamek beat Arreola, Michael Grant, and Kevin McBride, all far bigger than him?

Yet against Vitali he couldn't do a thing.

[Toney Loc]

Size is bull**** if you don't utilize it. If it was all about size, Valuev would be the GOAT and Paul Williams would be an ATG WW.

[AntonTheMeh]

Originally Posted by bojangles1987

It's obviously how you use the size. That's why Lennox was so good, and that's why both Klitschkos are so good. They maximize the advantages their height provides against their opponents.

agreed. i mean, are we supposed to pretend like its a bad thing? if the guy alluded to that being the sole reason behind their success then, i get the beef. but its not. they're both head and shoulders above any other guys (pun intended) in that division skill wise and everybody knows that.