Are all modern fighters bigger?

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Scott9945
    Gonna be more su****ious
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Mar 2007
    • 22032
    • 741
    • 1,371
    • 30,075

    #21
    Originally posted by Elroy1
    - Prior to the 80's there were far fewer truly ripped HW's because there were much poorer modes of training and nutrition.
    Translation: we have much more advanced chemicals to enhance physiques than we did then.

    And that's the god damn truth. It has very little to do with training and nutrition.

    Comment

    • Ray Corso
      Undisputed Champion
      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
      • Jan 2012
      • 7988
      • 609
      • 0
      • 21,253

      #22
      Buster was in shape his body type however wasn't a genetic wonder ike Ali.
      As for Galento he trained by drinking beer and lots of it he's the original Butterbean!

      Body types have always been talked about in boxing but its not a bodybuilding competition. Archie Moore was a heavy set man and you can see him at 175+ as chunky it made no difference when discussing his knowledge and experiences and ability.
      Kenny Norton was ripped to shreds at 6'3" 220 he was an outstanding athlete
      yet he adapted to an awkward non athletic style in the ring.
      Wlad is an outstanding athlete for his size yet in the ring he is stiff and his mobility is limited to stepping around not using lateral moves in fluid motion like an Ali.

      Point being everyone has a different look and body type it has nothing to do with their success. The few exceptions like an Ali, Jones, Leonard etc....
      are far and few in between.

      Areola is a limited talent with minimal skills if you knew anything about the sport you would know that. Winning bouts over other limited talents who have "current day" titles doesn't mean your good it means your part of the standard ordinary crop of the day. Canerra had a title too moron!
      Ray

      Comment

      • billeau2
        Undisputed Champion
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Jun 2012
        • 27645
        • 6,396
        • 14,933
        • 339,839

        #23
        Originally posted by Ray Corso
        Buster was in shape his body type however wasn't a genetic wonder ike Ali.
        As for Galento he trained by drinking beer and lots of it he's the original Butterbean!

        Body types have always been talked about in boxing but its not a bodybuilding competition. Archie Moore was a heavy set man and you can see him at 175+ as chunky it made no difference when discussing his knowledge and experiences and ability.
        Kenny Norton was ripped to shreds at 6'3" 220 he was an outstanding athlete
        yet he adapted to an awkward non athletic style in the ring.
        Wlad is an outstanding athlete for his size yet in the ring he is stiff and his mobility is limited to stepping around not using lateral moves in fluid motion like an Ali.

        Point being everyone has a different look and body type it has nothing to do with their success. The few exceptions like an Ali, Jones, Leonard etc....
        are far and few in between.

        Areola is a limited talent with minimal skills if you knew anything about the sport you would know that. Winning bouts over other limited talents who have "current day" titles doesn't mean your good it means your part of the standard ordinary crop of the day. Canerra had a title too moron!
        Ray
        you mean that puny skinny fat 260 pound guy? Canera had about 5% body fat that was there for emergencies and is a 90 pound weakling compared to the likes of Valuev.

        Comment

        • Ray Corso
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Jan 2012
          • 7988
          • 609
          • 0
          • 21,253

          #24
          Canera had a fantastic physique but his talents were closer to Arreolla's.
          I have very little to say about the likes of Valuev, he would look horrible in with great fighters and only intrique on how he would be beaten up would allow spectators. Evander far beyond his best beat him but couldn't dominate because Holyfield was a shell compared to his best against him.

          Comment

          • Elroy1
            Undisputed Champion
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Jun 2014
            • 6561
            • 237
            • 61
            • 14,370

            #25
            Originally posted by VG_Addict
            Arreola lost every time he stepped up. He lost to Vitali, Adamek, and Stiverne twice.
            You can draw that line in the sand about many boxers.

            As if it's a shame to lose to guys of that calibre anyway!

            Comment

            • billeau2
              Undisputed Champion
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Jun 2012
              • 27645
              • 6,396
              • 14,933
              • 339,839

              #26
              Originally posted by Ray Corso
              Canera had a fantastic physique but his talents were closer to Arreolla's.
              I have very little to say about the likes of Valuev, he would look horrible in with great fighters and only intrique on how he would be beaten up would allow spectators. Evander far beyond his best beat him but couldn't dominate because Holyfield was a shell compared to his best against him.
              I actually seriously heard he may have had Gigaintism...which would make him very weak physically due to his size.

              Comment

              • Elroy1
                Undisputed Champion
                Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                • Jun 2014
                • 6561
                • 237
                • 61
                • 14,370

                #27
                I'm confused...

                FIRST: Boxers are fatter than ever today...

                [Truth exposed]

                NEXT: Oh they drank beer, it was genetic, it's the chemcals, insert some other excuse.

                Think it's time to accept reality.

                Comment

                • Ray Corso
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • Jan 2012
                  • 7988
                  • 609
                  • 0
                  • 21,253

                  #28
                  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  I'm confused....................Constantly, we know!

                  FIRST: Boxers are fatter than ever today............as opposed to yesterday?

                  [Truth exposed]..............truth? What does the truth have to do with you!

                  NEXT: Oh they drank beer, (Galento)it was genetic (Norton), it's the chemcals, (its you) insert some other excuse.

                  Think it's time to accept reality. REALITY has no meaning with you!

                  There you go sonny, relax for a day and go away!

                  Comment

                  • BennyST
                    Shhhh...
                    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                    • Nov 2007
                    • 9263
                    • 1,036
                    • 500
                    • 21,301

                    #29
                    Originally posted by Elroy1
                    - Prior to the 80's there were far fewer truly ripped HW's because there were much poorer modes of training and nutrition. Most all of the cnsiderably athletic boxers of those times were a kind of rather unhealthy bodytype known as "skinny-fat" where they retain an emergency layer of chub and catabolise their muscles away.
                    Originally posted by Scott9945
                    Translation: we have much more advanced chemicals to enhance physiques than we did then.

                    And that's the god damn truth. It has very little to do with training and nutrition.
                    Even then, it's just untrue anyway.

                    If you took the top ten guys from today and the top ten guys from the 60's or whatever, the 60's guys would, in general, be trimmer, leaner and in better shape all around than today's guys I think. The only difference seems to be the general weight of today's heavies.

                    There just happen to be a few exceptions that get on the roids and bulk up.

                    Also, it simply comes down to the change to the way todays weigh in is done. Nothing more. They get more time to put weight back on so it goes without saying that they are going to weigh more. Nothing to do with training, nutrition or any other factors. If you gave an extra day for people to bulk up again after the weigh in back in the 50's, the exact same thing would happen. Guys would start coming in at 170-175 for middleweight fights, 160 for welterweight fights etc etc etc.
                    Last edited by BennyST; 10-20-2015, 08:32 PM.

                    Comment

                    • Mr.MojoRisin'
                      Crawling King Snake
                      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                      • Jul 2015
                      • 2458
                      • 77
                      • 53
                      • 10,555

                      #30
                      Once you get to MW and up then yes. Mainly HW, which is where all the nonathletic overgrown misfits reign. It will be back to normal though in a decade or two.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP