6ft9 280lb Fury destroys any old timer boxer

[Willie Pep 229]

Its not about the clinch, it has to do with before the clinch. Weight is not the only factor regarding heavyweights...

If you watch Johnson-Willard you see Williard lay his weight (each chance he gets) on Johnson for 24 rounds - When Dempsey fought him Dempsey tried to refuse the clinches by darting in and out not letting Willard use his size/weight advantage.

[QueensburyRules]

A ten count isn't ten seconds. Fury was up in ten.

One would expect a boxing historian such as yourself to understand how a ten count works.

- -Modern 10 counts include 10-15 more sec of evaluation.

U even watch boxing?

Big George was up at 10 that turned out to be a 9 sec count and was counted out by Zach Clayton, an elderly ref two years inactive and likely exhausted in the heat and humidity and constant breaks. Ali immediately collapses for at least 30 sec. That's how the 10 count worked in The Rumble...

[JAB5239]

- -Modern 10 counts include 10-15 more sec of evaluation.

U even watch boxing?

Big George was up at 10 that turned out to be a 9 sec count and was counted out by Zach Clayton, an elderly ref two years inactive and likely exhausted in the heat and humidity and constant breaks. Ali immediately collapses for at least 30 sec. That's how the 10 count worked in The Rumble...

You're a notorious liar in these parts. Foreman is on record saying he was beaten legitimately. You going on and making up lies makes you look even more foolish. Put the bottle down you drunkard!

[Willie Pep 229]

You're a notorious liar in these parts. Foreman is on record saying he was beaten legitimately. You going on and making up lies makes you look even more foolish. Put the bottle down you drunkard!

I don't agree - Foreman was up soon enough that the ref could have hesitated his count and accepted George as 'up' - it wouldn't have been controversial it was close enough. I believe the count was much like the bad count Walcott got- Marcinao 2

But also your are correct Foreman saw himself as a beaten fighter - he barely acknowledged the ref and headed straight back to his corner with no compliant. (Until of course a day later when all the complaining started.)

[billeau2]

Per the usual, this discussion comes down to whether or not you believe that being a bigger heavyweight is akin to being in a different weight class.

Consider Duran or Benny Leonard, or whomever you consider to be the greatest lightweight ever, on a P4P (skill and ability level) theyd be far better than most any Light Heavy Weight. Yet if you put them in the ring as a lightweight, not putting on weight to make it even, would you favor them to beat a solid LHW (say Bivol) or is the weight difference too great? Frankly, I don't think a LW Duran could beat a LHW Bivol, despite the fact that Duran is rougher, tougher, more skilled, and better as a boxer.

Now thats not to say that every fighter who simply weighed in at 175 pounds would beat a lightweight Duran, but setting the bar here at a title contender level (which Fury clearly is).

So, does the size difference as heavy matter the same as weight difference between weight classes? Or, for some reason does being over the arbitrary weight of 175 lbs (original Heavyweight "floor") make size differences obsolete?

Its important to note something the late great Ray Corso would often point out: "the heavyweight division is an open division with no weight restrictions." Also consider that there has never been even a correlation between punching hard and size in boxing, north of super middle weight, or so. Then point out there seems to be some physical delineations that human physiology is subject to... Like the fact that big human being starts to lose the advantage of size relatively quickly North of like 190. You can see proof of this when female boxers who weigh in at under 150..even 130, can beat up men in the ring fairly easily because they know how to punch... not other men prizefighters, but other men who are strong, able and know how to fight a bit... AND it is documented that a women fighter Daina Wolf @ around 140ish registered a harder punch than a heavyweight MMA champ known for being a striker!

If we can see evidence of punching power neutralized even in a discrepancy such as that between the ***es... How much does that discrepency fade, when we are talking about men who might simply carry a simple weight advantage over another man?

And... reach, a much greater advantage is never really discussed...

And finally, what stopped heavyweights from weighing a lot in the past was a preference, not the inabilility to come in around 200, or north of 200 for a fight. In fact what makes a heavyweight is bone size, upper body strength, more than pure weight. Bob Fitzzimons had small legs, and a trunk, shoulders of a big man. His punch carried... All these factors made him able to beat Corbett for the heavyweight crown.

Just a few considerations

[billeau2]

- -Modern 10 counts include 10-15 more sec of evaluation.

U even watch boxing?

Big George was up at 10 that turned out to be a 9 sec count and was counted out by Zach Clayton, an elderly ref two years inactive and likely exhausted in the heat and humidity and constant breaks. Ali immediately collapses for at least 30 sec. That's how the 10 count worked in The Rumble...

YOu couldn't make this s h i t up... oh wait a minute, thats what you did... I think the heat exhausted your brain, permanently.

[billeau2]

I genuinely don't see how someone such as yourself who knows his boxing, thinks that Rocky would stand a chance against a giant technician like Fury.

Marciano had no technique and no size.... Yes he was tough and could punch hard, but a man with his average
physical attributes and limited skillset needs a lot more than that to beat Tyson Fury.

Sigh! Denium Denium Denium... My fellow Gypsy King lover... This road you are going down... You really summed it up in the first statement (bolded) Then you compound an error in the second statement.

You have to watch tape where Marciano's technique is deconstructed. There are plenty of such threads that have such a tape here in this section. But first "knowing one's boxing" means understanding what Marciano is truly about. It sure sounds good to say "arrgh in them days (****ney accent) them boys were simple yeah! A brute like Marciano could have his way!" But no dear fellow Gypsy lover... No no no... First lets take a trip back to the other greatest fighter there ever was according to the pundits. His name was Hank Armstrong. There is plenty of tape showing his technical points as well... Armstrong did not look suave, or pretty, but was a killer in the ring, relentless, always approaching, always at an ackward angle, always pushing his man back. This was a style that depended on certain gifts... athletacism, endurance, and knowing how to deflect and hit at the same time... This is the line Marciano came from...

Sam Goldman was a genius. marciano had two left feet, he looped his shots, and was ackward. But Sam saw what others did not: Boy marciano couldn hit! the guy could also learn, he had even been a ball player. And Marciano had that rare ability to keep coming as long as there was breath to be had. Goldman taught marciano to fight so that his lack of reach, finesse, etc were moot points. Goldmans revisions are subtle, you have to know what to look for and where there is precident. Marciano always fought in a crouch, presenting a very small target. He only came up to attack, and when he threw he didn't need to care where he hit you. Using your weight to push Marciano back...goodluck! That crouch was like a wrestler;s sprawl. And all the while? incoming punches to deal with.

I would implore you to look on Youtube at a technical breakdown of Armstrong and Marciano... To understand why it might be more difficult for a fighter, no matter the size, to stop Marciano.

[DeeMoney]

Its important to note something the late great Ray Corso would often point out: "the heavyweight division is an open division with no weight restrictions." Also consider that there has never been even a correlation between punching hard and size in boxing, north of super middle weight, or so. Then point out there seems to be some physical delineations that human physiology is subject to... Like the fact that big human being starts to lose the advantage of size relatively quickly North of like 190. You can see proof of this when female boxers who weigh in at under 150..even 130, can beat up men in the ring fairly easily because they know how to punch... not other men prizefighters, but other men who are strong, able and know how to fight a bit... AND it is documented that a women fighter Daina Wolf @ around 140ish registered a harder punch than a heavyweight MMA champ known for being a striker!

If we can see evidence of punching power neutralized even in a discrepancy such as that between the ***es... How much does that discrepency fade, when we are talking about men who might simply carry a simple weight advantage over another man?

And... reach, a much greater advantage is never really discussed...

And finally, what stopped heavyweights from weighing a lot in the past was a preference, not the inabilility to come in around 200, or north of 200 for a fight. In fact what makes a heavyweight is bone size, upper body strength, more than pure weight. Bob Fitzzimons had small legs, and a trunk, shoulders of a big man. His punch carried... All these factors made him able to beat Corbett for the heavyweight crown.

Just a few considerations

1) Not for me, I think reach is a HUGE advantage, and think thats Fury's biggest advantage in regards to size- far more than weight which I could give or take. I am sure people will cite various precedence of fighters with significantly shorter reach winning big fights. But you could do that with any attribute (sometimes the slow guy win, sometimes the dumb guy wins, etc). To me, Fury's reach, combined with his agility gives him a great advantage in being able to jab n grab. He's rarely ever punished in any meaningful way for hit, so he just hits his opponent while at his range, and once they get within their range he holds them.

2) The ideas of weight, weight training, and things of that nature that people in all sports had in the past were often times mistaken. NFL linemen in the 60s would rarely try to weigh more than 250 lbs under the idea that they would be too slow and bulky (despite the fact that they arent as fast as most of the 300+ lbers today). Baseball players rarely lifted prior to the 1980s, afraid that lifting weights would cause them to be too bulky. Heck, a lot of people in general 70 years ago were afraid that weight training would give them deadly heart problems. We know this to be false now, but just because someone didn't do something in days gone by doesnt make that thing right or wrong.
That being written, I could see stamina as having a major impact on choosing not to carry extra weight, and I have argued that here before. Boxing, more than people often cite, is as much of an endurance sport as anything else. You could argue that fighters are benefitted from carrying a build closer to a distance runner than a sprinter- there is no subbing out or extended breaks in boxing. Thats why simply being heavier is not always beneficial- and thats what makes this a legitimate discussion.

[QueensburyRules]

You're a notorious liar in these parts. Foreman is on record saying he was beaten legitimately. You going on and making up lies makes you look even more foolish. Put the bottle down you drunkard!

- -Need to stop bagging U glue.

Big George in the school of Dempsey and Louis in being magnanimous in his treatment of other fighters. Ali won a nominal controversial battle well recorded in literature, and George won The War. Buy a clue, not more glue...

[JAB5239]

YOu couldn't make this s h i t up... oh wait a minute, thats what you did... I think the heat exhausted your brain, permanently.

Exactly. That idiot uses his deranged imagination to concoct scenarios to fit his agenda. It's sickening. The guy clearly needs help.