What evidence do we have that heavyweights were too small in the past to compete today? and what determines a fighters size?

[Ivich]

Oh to be very clear, I think Ivich is a dumb person. His argument is ****** and I do believe one has to be ****** to believe such ******ity.


Also, I'd like to point something out. Youse do have a rocket scientist hur. Youse could ask him about physics and ****, but since I don't agree with the tard **** youse learned from boxing you know why you don't. If you could use my credentials to enforce your opinion you'd jump on it like a fly on ****, but, since you know I don't agree it's what does working on missiles and rockets got to do with boxing right?


Goddamn right it ain't rocket science Ivich.

I wouldn't use a quote from you to wipe my arse with,you harmless lunatic!

[Ivich]

Spot on. CouldnâÂÂt have said it better myself. There literally is no relation or way of proving it. And if its that hard to prove it shouldnâÂÂt matter. Way too many large men have been toppled by smaller men in every single era. Even today.

How many of those men you named were 185lbs, with a 68 in reach, and were under 5'11in?

[Marchegiano]

Do you seriously suppose I need assistance composing posts from a verified nutter like you? LOL!!!!

Your work?
Do you honestly think I would stoop to plagiarise your lunatic scriblings?

When have you ever written a post worth a cup of cold piss?

Apart from your schizoid, pidgin scribblings , what on earth have you to offer a boxing fan?

Your unintelligible ramblings got you banned from two forums!

I don't consciously disagree with you ,I don't intentionally read your drivel!

You are regarded with tolerant condescension by the majority.

A harmless" anorak "who is fixated on mythical gladiators,whom nobody gives a flying **** about!


Loonies like you are not on my radar!
But thanks for the entertainment, though you didn't actually say anything!!! LOL

and here we have Ivich to play his role pretty perfectly.

See what I am doing to these guys apples? I know you're a nice guy, but trust me, they deserve it. They don't even have the self-awareness to understand what just happened.

Cantankerous and stubborn. Basically if you say anything doesn't agree with the nonsense they've been pushing for years they don't even try to understand what you're telling them.


Did I allude to writing when I said my work? Is that what all you guys got out of what I said? Or is it exclusive to Ivich?

Z? Was I clear about having worked on rockets and missiles when I said I work on rockets and missiles?


Ivich is cantankerous as **** right? Just going off all left field about something not even related to what I said. I'll tell you this for free bro, between the two of youse, as a person, Z's cooler. He is a cantankerous stubborn old ****er, but he at least has some emotional fortitude to him. We all know why Ivich though I meant writing, he barely read **** and had a little emotional rant anyway. Z's never ever done that, because he's cooler.



Summarized: You both cantankerous stubborn ****s but at least Dr. Z's a man. Ivich's a very old child.

[Ivich]

and here we have Ivich to play his role pretty perfectly.

See what I am doing to these guys apples? I know you're a nice guy, but trust me, they deserve it. They don't even have the self-awareness to understand what just happened.

Cantankerous and stubborn. Basically if you say anything doesn't agree with the nonsense they've been pushing for years they don't even try to understand what you're telling them.


Did I allude to writing when I said my work? Is that what all you guys got out of what I said? Or is it exclusive to Ivich?

Z? Was I clear about having worked on rockets and missiles when I said I work on rockets and missiles?


Ivich is cantankerous as **** right? Just going off all left field about something not even related to what I said. I'll tell you this for free bro, between the two of youse, as a person, Z's cooler. He is a cantankerous stubborn old ****er, but he at least has some emotional fortitude to him. We all know why Ivich though I meant writing, he barely read **** and had a little emotional rant anyway. Z's never ever done that, because he's cooler.



Summarized: You both cantankerous stubborn ****s but at least Dr. Z's a man. Ivich's a very old child.

You should have been on a rocket, the one they sent up with a Chimp in it! You sad fool! lol

[The Defecator]

Size matters, up to a certain point.

Total numbers are misleading, as well. A difference of 10 pounds means a lot more to a fighter who weighs 120 pounds than it does to a fighter who weighs 200 pounds, for example. A percentage would be a better way of evaluating than just crude bulk numbers, methinks.

[Ivich]

Total numbers are misleading, as well. A difference of 10 pounds means a lot more to a fighter who weighs 120 pounds than it does to a fighter who weighs 200 pounds, for example. A percentage would be a better way of evaluating than just crude bulk numbers, methinks.

Yes, 10lbs between heavies is nothing,50lbs however, definitely is.

[Slugfester]

Mr. Margarine has an excellent point about examining the era just prior to a new weight division being formed.

My idea is that new weight divisions may have been formed because the larger fighters were at a disadvantage due to weight cutting and not as much food and even water.. Didn't most of the new divisions begin after weight cutting became a prominent feature of the sport?

Other than that, I have decent belief that old adages come about for experiential reasons. In other words, someone noticed something that seemed to be true most of the time--a good big man beats a good little man, and it stuck because others saw it to be true as well. Otherwise the adage would be different.

All else being equal, the significantly larger man wins more often than not. If it made no difference, and fighting a bigger man was no different from fighting a smaller one, half the fighters out there would not cutting massive weight even for the lighter divisions.

Of course greed controls boxing, so orgs love new divisions too. Still, I think there may very well be practical reasons too that make sense for having new divisions and they are the right thing and the best thing for boxing.

[them_apples]

Yes, 10lbs between heavies is nothing,50lbs however, definitely is.

50 lbs of what though? Heavyweight has no weight limit. Thats why many of them carry weight.

you keep mentioning Marcianos small size. Yes he’s small, but his bones are very thick. His wrists and fists almost look cartoonish, as his wrists are nearly as thick as his fists. The mans built for punching. You wouldn’t see that though, or look that deeply.

[them_apples]

Mr. Margarine has an excellent point about examining the era just prior to a new weight division being formed.

My idea is that new weight divisions may have been formed because the larger fighters were at a disadvantage due to weight cutting and not as much food and even water.. Didn't most of the new divisions begin after weight cutting became a prominent feature of the sport?

Other than that, I have decent belief that old adages come about for experiential reasons. In other words, someone noticed something that seemed to be true most of the time--a good big man beats a good little man, and it stuck because others saw it to be true as well. Otherwise the adage would be different.

All else being equal, the significantly larger man wins more often than not. If it made no difference, and fighting a bigger man was no different from fighting a smaller one, half the fighters out there would not cutting massive weight even for the lighter divisions.

Of course greed controls boxing, so orgs love new divisions too. Still, I think there may very well be practical reasons too that make sense for having new divisions and they are the right thing and the best thing for boxing.

The thing is, I could swear the first thing I noticed at heavyweight is a good smaller man tends to be better than a good big man - because heavyweights don’t keep their agility and coordination as they grow. It’s very rare to have a big man who can really carry his own weight. Foreman was an anomaly. Guys like Lewis, Cooney, Joshua they suffer from being heavier and all lost to smaller guys because of it. They are big, but slower and bigger targets and not as strong from a p4p standpoint.

when people start getting bigger, after a certain point it’s mostly just height they are gaining. They don’t always have bigger or more robust structure.

You can see this in a guy like Thomas Hearns, since we saw him campaign at so many weight classes. While his natural frame is 147 lbs, when he put on weight he was a cruiserweight.

what a guy like ivich thinks is that once Hearns weighs 190 he’s as thoroughbred as a guy who cut 30 lbs and shredded down to 190, and whome has a skull twice as big among other things.

It’s called being blown up. And because boxing is a striking sport - being lighter helps.

Because ivich doesn’t seem to know much about Marciano, he doesn’t take into account the type of person Marciano was and what made him great. Marciano trained harder than any fighter documented over the past 100 years. His personality lended to his training habits. Marciano is a strong, strong man. Marciano is great because he took his weaknesses and made them strengths. He fought with great intelligence considering how rough his style was. Marciano really understood fighting.

[them_apples]

Oh I am here. Please tell us which ranked heavyweight under 205 pounds since Mike Spinks was ranked back in 1987. Now go!

Newer fighters started carrying more weight. They didn’t know and still don’t know what they were doing. Bulking didn’t help those fighters.