Are old-time heavyweights too small? Take the poll

[Marchegiano]

Nope they did not ,when heavyweights were in the 170 /190lbs region and you proved **** All.

Q.In the modern era when heavyweights are routinely over 200lbs and over 6 ft .

WHY HAS EVERY FIGHTER COMING UP FROM LHVY/CRUISER ADDED POUNDAGE TO COMPETE AT HEAVYWEIGHT?

YES I WANT PROOF! IF YOU MAKE A STATEMENT THAT I BELIEVE IS WRONG I REQUIRE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR STATEMENT AND IN RETURN I WILL PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT MINE!

AND HERE MINE IS !

IN THE MODERN ERA SEVERAL MEN FROM THE LOWER WEIGHTS HAVE COMPETED AT HEAVYWEIGHT THEY HAVE WITHOUT EXCEPTION ADDED WEIGHT TO DO SO.
ELLIS
M SPINKS
MOORER
HOLYFIELD
JONES JNR
USYK
You are forced to refer back to the early1900's to try and prove your point.
Lets look at those early champions .

Sullivan198lbs

Corbett178lbs

Fitzsimmons 167lbs

Jeffries 206lbs

Hart192lbs

Burns 175lbs


Johnson194lbs

Jeffries at 6ft and 206lbs was considered a giant! Today, at that weight he would be a cruiser!

Way back then smaller challengers were not usually giving away the huge amount of tonnage they would be required to do so today.
Now, who would seriously consider matching a Corbett or a Fitzsimmons with a top ranked heavyweight of today?

Please provide examples of exemptions filed by smaller men to fight heavyweights?
You want to get sarky with me? Okay you do it, I can handle anything you can offer and come back a hundred fold. So if that's what you want ,bring it on becaude, when I'm finished with you,you'll need sutures in your anus!

I want proof of this lack of exemption.

It shouldn't be on me to prove to you the weight divisions are there for a reason. You want me to find an official statement from the bodies telling you they don't make weight regulations for ****s and giggles.


Let's be clear, this is one of your dumbest stances you enjoy taking.


What TF is the point of weight divisions so say the bodies? To save lives? For safety? What other safety rules can be chucked by a single fighter in a fight? No exemption or agreement needed. Oh yes it is that dumb.



Edit-

Honestly didn't notice what you're talking about wouldn't require exemption. Roy was not below the minimum. Today a 193 needs an exemption from the WBC to fight for their HW title. Maybe figure out TF you're talking about before you get threatening?

[Bronson66]

I want proof of this lack of exemption.

It shouldn't be on me to prove to you the weight divisions are there for a reason. You want me to find an official statement from the bodies telling you they don't make weight regulations for ****s and giggles.


Let's be clear, this is one of your dumbest stances you enjoy taking.


What TF is the point of weight divisions so say the bodies? To save lives? For safety? What other safety rules can be chucked by a single fighter in a fight? No exemption or agreement needed. Oh yes it is that dumb.



Edit-

Honestly didn't notice what you're talking about wouldn't require exemption. Roy was not below the minimum. Today a 193 needs an exemption from the WBC to fight for their HW title. Maybe figure out TF you're talking about before you get threatening?

I'm positive I know what I'm talking about ,just as I'm positive you don't.
You have never answered my repeated question on why boxers from lower weights added weights to compete at heavyweight and you never will,because there is only one explanation and for you to admit that blows your case completely out of the water !

I never said any rules were ever ignored ,I asked for examples,of boxers filing for exemptions to compete in higher divisions.

I also never asked you to prove the necessity for weight divisions, I've been aware of the reason for over 60 years!

You've come looking to dig me out on two separate threads with unnecessarily sarcastic remarks.I'm just telling you I'm up for it if you want to continue.
If you insult me expect incoming,because believe me you will get it ,and that ain't a threat ,its a fact!

[Dr Z]

Nope they did not ,when heavyweights were in the 170 /190lbs region and you proved **** All.

Q.In the modern era when heavyweights are routinely over 200lbs and over 6 ft .

WHY HAS EVERY FIGHTER COMING UP FROM LHVY/CRUISER ADDED POUNDAGE TO COMPETE AT HEAVYWEIGHT?

YES I WANT PROOF! IF YOU MAKE A STATEMENT THAT I BELIEVE IS WRONG I REQUIRE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR STATEMENT AND IN RETURN I WILL PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT MINE!

AND HERE MINE IS !

IN THE MODERN ERA SEVERAL MEN FROM THE LOWER WEIGHTS HAVE COMPETED AT HEAVYWEIGHT THEY HAVE WITHOUT EXCEPTION ADDED WEIGHT TO DO SO.
ELLIS
M SPINKS
MOORER
HOLYFIELD
JONES JNR
USYK
You are forced to refer back to the early1900's to try and prove your point.
Lets look at those early champions .

Sullivan198lbs

Corbett178lbs

Fitzsimmons 167lbs

Jeffries 206lbs

Hart192lbs

Burns 175lbs


Johnson194lbs

Jeffries at 6ft and 206lbs was considered a giant! Today, at that weight he would be a cruiser!

Way back then smaller challengers were not usually giving away the huge amount of tonnage they would be required to do so today.
Now, who would seriously consider matching a Corbett or a Fitzsimmons with a top ranked heavyweight of today?

Please provide examples of exemptions filed by smaller men to fight heavyweights?
You want to get sarky with me? Okay you do it, I can handle anything you can offer and come back a hundred fold. So if that's what you want ,bring it on becaude, when I'm finished with you,you'll need sutures in your anus!

Okay Spinks is an exception that is 35+ years old ( under 210 ). He really caught an older champion to win the title and was gifted by the judges in the tr-match if we are honest.

Jeffries foght his title matches at an average of 217 so so. Now if he was around today I could easily see him at 230-235 LBS in good shape.

Getting back to sub 210 pounders winning championships. Unless the opponent suffers an injury during the match or was old, I fail to see one example of them winning since 1985. That is 40 years of boxing?

Serve me back on that if you can. I will risk you doing to 100 fold.

[Bronson66]

[QUOTE=Dr Z;n32424951]





[SIZE=18px]Okay Spinks is an exception that is 35+ years old ( under 210 ). He really caught an older champion to win the title and was gifted by the judges in the tr-match if we are honest.

Jeffries foght his title matches at an average of 217 so so. Now if he was around today I could easily see him at 230-235 LBS in good shape.

Getting back to sub 210 pounders winning championships. Unless the opponent suffers an injury during the match or was old, I fail to see one example of them winning since 1985. That is 40 years of boxing?

Serve me back on that if you can. I will risk you doing to 100 fold.Quote/

I just corrected you. I quoted the weights those men were when they won their titles,what any of them would weigh today is irrelevant to the question you asked,which I have answered.

[billeau2]

The question I have repeatedly asked and never gotten a satisfactory reply to is. Why has every boxer who successfully moved up from,Lhvy and Cruiser to win at Heavyweight,deliberately added weight to their frames to do so if small ,up to 200lbs heavies, are big enough to handle todays giants?

It is a good question. I would imagine that while this weight gain has varied, it has been a priority enough that many fighters even took artificial means to produce the weight. I do think there is a belief that to fight upwards one has to cross a certain threshold with their weight. Is it actually necessary? I suspect it is, though it is funny how it was presaged that this was the age of the giant heavyweights, yet, we still get a good sample of weights in the champions, Yes more than past champs, but not necessarily the weight of Fury, Lewis, Klitsko etc.

Yes the average heavyweight carries more weight than previous champions, that is a fact.

[billeau2]

Because they got lazy and wanted to eat?

.

[billeau2]

Not quite sure what you are asking with the questions, I think we may be just talking past each other with this. My point was related to your initial post about evolution. In that people are bigger now (compared to 100 years ago), but it is not evolution. You are right, darwinian evolution would not happen in that time frame, but as I have written, people as a whole are bigger now. The primary reason for that seems to be improved diet and living standards as compared to a century plus ago.

Since there are more naturally bigger people, it makes sense that there are more naturally bigger people in heavyweight boxing. This doesn't mean there arent also heavyweights who arent as big (heck our heavyweight champion now has the same height and reach as the heavyweight champ did 60 years ago). Just that with more big people (in rgards to height) as a whole, there is a greater likelihood for their to be more big people (in regards to height) involved in heavyweight boxing.

I don't see why there wouldn't be a logical chain. It seems as if there should be a direct correlation between general population and the pool for heavyweight fighters. Am interested in why you would think other wise?

Ok bare with me, I know it may look like a lot of nonsense but let me try to explain my reasons. When you say people are bigger, you are absolutely correct. We have to look more carefully at if this is a reason why heavyweights are larger. I know it would seem to be logical on the surface to believe that a general trend with people getting larger would make any sports have bigger athletes, but if we really look carefully sometimes what appears to be true might not be.

Trying to think of a good example... Ok lets say a study finds that kids with higher IQ's have a base level of technical proficiency that matches their intelligence. So... All kids with an IQ of 150 and above show the ability to use technology at a higher level.... Now, lets then isolate kids in the group with !Q above 170, which is really high (no matter what anyone tells ya these days lol). One would expect these kids, like the whole group to be proficient in technology as well right? Well... It turns out when finding such rare intelligence the kids can come from virtually anywhere. And lo and behold, some 170 plus kids come from villages with one internet connection, some come from cities, but the sample of this group of kids does not have the same relationship to technology as the whole group of kids above 150 !Q, they are a little diffrent because they are so rare.

Now, when we get a heavyweight fighter they are analogous to this group of 170 plus IQ... Yes they may be part of "bigger people" but, they are a much smaller group of bigger people and may have a different reason for there size, because they are so rare. Maybe heavyweights are bigger now because they are taught to come in bigger... Or because trainers insist they become bigger to fight other heavyweights... For example, Usyk has bulked up, but he could be fighting as a heavyweight back when the average size was smaller, and come in at a comprable weight.

So my point is, we may not know the reason why heavyweights are bigger given how rare a selection they are amongst the population of bigger people in the population. It may be a reason other than the general trend affecting the average larger person.

If this is too convoluted, I understand! And I am not disagreeing with your general observation. I just thought I would take one more crack at trying to explain my logic here. If it is not understood it is most certainly because I have not found an adequate way to make the point clear... It is not on you.

[billeau2]

This is an interesting question, that to me is actually a couple questions.

When we write that populations are taller now as a whole than those of 100 years ago, thats mostly just due to an abundance of healthy calories and health care available to most of the population. Take the Netherlands, currently the tallest nation in the world; they have all those factors, plus they are relatively isolated from third world nations which means there once was fewer immigrants coming from poorer nations which could bring their average height down (please don't assume I am writing any opinion on immigration, just stating what it would lead to in regards to height). The average man in the Netherlands is a little taller than 6 feet tall, but this doesnt necessarily mean that the tallest person in the world will come from there rather that the shortest will be taller, the median will be taller, and there will be more men over given heights than other countries.

That being written, in lieu of medical advances (or selective breeding) they are probably as close to the peak as a population would get to naturally. That being written, and this is just a hypothetical, if we practiced selective breeding that number could probably get a lot taller. Think of it as the same as the domestication of the dog. If you had a population that only allowed healthy men over 6'6" and women over 6'0" to have kids, and maintained this for several generations; then as long as they had an abundance of calories and available medicine then I bet their average height would end up near the 7'0" (this is basically what they did with Yao Ming's parents). I guess it could be tested on a smaller scale if you just isolated a tall population for several generations.

I noted healthy on the explanation because I don't know how doing this with people who had acromegaly would play out. There seems to be a lot of health issues that come about with that.

That being written, I don't know if the average would get bigger than 7'0" as there are very few people who reach above 7'3" without any form of gigantism.

Selective breeding in one sense is analogous to speeding up Evolution. So yes, it would be easy to make the very unattainable rare traits affecting size more dominant... Resulting in bigger people. Most people do not know that Eugenics was originally designed to benefit humankind. Before it became a nasty business of reinforcing prejudices and hogwash instead of science.

I often play devils advocate and ask people to imagine a world where living things... People, our pets, etc were not plagued with horrid diseases... Of course it is always more complicated than that... But one can dream.

[billeau2]

Holyfileld was 6'2" 208lbs when he beat Douglas for the title.
Chris Byrd was 6' 210lbs when he beat Vits.

Yup, and the real confusion here is that at least Holyfield FELT the need to get bigger... I do not know about Byrd. It seems that heavyweights gave felt a need to add heft, I question whether this was always a good idea. Certainly sometimes it was.

[JAB5239]

Yup, and the real confusion here is that at least Holyfield FELT the need to get bigger... I do not know about Byrd. It seems that heavyweights gave felt a need to add heft, I question whether this was always a good idea. Certainly sometimes it was.

I think it depends on the individual. Some carry it better than others, and it can detract from somes silly and athleticism while not others.