Are all modern fighters bigger?

[NChristo]

Most of your post has little to do with HW's.

Swimming is not new either ,its the most effective way to train for overall cardio,working lungs and all muscles .

Neither did his post, he said that boxers today do not run long distances, especially heavyweights (That includes every other weightclass,) which is complete rubbish, boxers mix up their regime so they do both long distance runs and sprints, some stick to one but still do the other here and there, long distance running has in no way disappeared from boxing and never will as he was trying to say because it is apparently not an ''optimal'' way of training.

I'm not saying todays HWs are lazy either, despite the average HW boxers today not in exactly fantastic looking shape (Some of them in pretty incredible shape though) a lot of them can still do a decent amount of rounds at a decent pace and they are in the ring fighting for **** sake but I would not say that just being stronger adds up to being a more effective HW (Wait), if they could take the time out of whatever they're doing wrong (Diet, Arreola trains like a beast but bloody hell) and brought themselves down too a more reasonable weight they would be so much better, for whatever reason in themselves they just won't though, take Solis for an example, incredible shape in the Amateurs, very skilled, knew how too pace himself, he would have been so much more effective against Vitali if he lost some pounds at the risk of losing strength (I'm not saying to lose 50 lb or something extreme but enough) I see the risk in losing that strength in the Super HW era but still if they could find a balance.

Not the biggest HW fan though honestly don't know what it is I just can't enjoy a HW fight like I can a lower weight whether it's Joshua, Wlad or whoever, you probably know more about the recent Heavyweight division then me and the state of it / it's boxers.

Foreman in his youth was not much of a runner

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-11-14/news/ls-2947_1_george-foreman

Q: How much running are you doing these days?

A: When I was a younger heavyweight champ, I would run maybe three miles a day. Now I set my runs traveling 10 miles and beyond. Every day, getting up early in the morning before much traffic, my wife takes me 10 miles from home, drops me off and I have to get back.

3 Miles isn't exactly a marathon but it's still a decent run every day, mainly posted this because I found the interview an alright read if anyone is interested.

[juggernaut666]

Neither did his post, he said that boxers today do not run long distances, especially heavyweights (That includes every other weightclass,) which is complete rubbish, boxers mix up their regime so they do both long distance runs and sprints, some stick to one but still do the other here and there, long distance running has in no way disappeared from boxing and never will as he was trying to say because it is apparently not an ''optimal'' way of training.

I'm not saying todays HWs are lazy either, despite the average HW boxers today not in exactly fantastic looking shape (Some of them in pretty incredible shape though) a lot of them can still do a decent amount of rounds at a decent pace and they are in the ring fighting for **** sake but I would not say that just being stronger adds up to being a more effective HW (Wait), if they could take the time out of whatever they're doing wrong (Diet, Arreola trains like a beast but bloody hell) and brought themselves down too a more reasonable weight they would be so much better, for whatever reason in themselves they just won't though, take Solis for an example, incredible shape in the Amateurs, very skilled, knew how too pace himself, he would have been so much more effective against Vitali if he lost some pounds at the risk of losing strength (I'm not saying to lose 50 lb or something extreme but enough) I see the risk in losing that strength in the Super HW era but still if they could find a balance.

Not the biggest HW fan though honestly don't know what it is I just can't enjoy a HW fight like I can a lower weight whether it's Joshua, Wlad or whoever, you probably know more about the recent Heavyweight division then me and the state of it / it's boxers.

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-11-14/news/ls-2947_1_george-foreman

Q: How much running are you doing these days?

A: When I was a younger heavyweight champ, I would run maybe three miles a day. Now I set my runs traveling 10 miles and beyond. Every day, getting up early in the morning before much traffic, my wife takes me 10 miles from home, drops me off and I have to get back.

3 Miles isn't exactly a marathon but it's still a decent run every day, mainly posted this because I found the interview an alright read if anyone is interested.

Foreman running 3 miles a day isnt overly much ,about 5 miles is .He MAY have run 10 but every day with his body type and 240 plus its unlikely ,running is an art ,running 10 ml a day ?I dont see it. What i do think is Foremans overall training with weights and strong Man lifting is what made him harder to fight .He was physical much more of a menace in his comeback than anyone that fought the 70's Foreman .This is bc he was at least 30 pounds heavier ,thru less punches and had more stamina in not wasting punches .He is an example of a super HWi was reffering to.


Finding balance of weight /speed /stamina /power is not all that easy ,i would take Haye for example great speed and power .What didnt he have to combat Wlad? Size was the missing ingredient there....now take a lesser fighter like giant Wach who did better against him ...why ?Size mainly ,even being a punching bag he was able to give himself a chance and actually stunned Wlad with a huge right hand in the 5th.

Fighters losing weight is not always an advantage ,some like Jennings /Povetkin are a small percentage now , get a guy like Joshua huge athletic well you have the second coming of a Lewis /Klitchko....then you have the Arreola who are just average compared to the top guys and probably needs the extra weight to fight better im assuming he cuts weight as it is,i think hes also around 6'4.

[VG_Addict]

Just a reminder, this is for ALL modern fighters, not just HWs.

[Elroy1]

Ok so many limit weight boxers still run SOME distance but you will find that that is mainly for a WARM UP...

Which brings me to another point..

What used to constitute a boxers ENTIRE training regime in the past, is TODAY only about 1/3rd of it.

Sometimes guys even had to work back in the day whereas today it is there JOB to train all the time.

Even little Manny Pacquiao at Welterweight consumes 8000cal a day during training, an amount difficult for even a big man to eat on average.

The main point with the running thing is not trying to pick at examples of it not being true like a religious defender, it is the recognise clearly and obviously that the overall trend has shifted from distance to intervals across the board!

Can you not see that?^^

[Elroy1]

OK Elroy, you say that Peter and Arreola are better technically than any HW before the 80s. Tell us what they do that makes them have better technique. Give us a breakdown.

- I did not say that Peter was technically better at all.

- Arreola is, his defence is cleaner, he sets his shots up nicer and his judgement of distance is sneaky..

The question really is- please indicate a HW who is technically better than him? I can't think of any (realistically)?

And don't give me any of this Ali, Foreman or Frazier rubbish because those guys could barely even box!

[Anthony342]

- I did not say that Peter was technically better at all.

- Arreola is, his defence is cleaner, he sets his shots up nicer and his judgement of distance is sneaky..

The question really is- please indicate a HW who is technically better than him? I can't think of any (realistically)?

And don't give me any of this Ali, Foreman or Frazier rubbish because those guys could barely even box!

Wow, just wow. These epic fail posts astound me.

[juggernaut666]

- I did not say that Peter was technically better at all.

- Arreola is, his defence is cleaner, he sets his shots up nicer and his judgement of distance is sneaky..

The question really is- please indicate a HW who is technically better than him? I can't think of any (realistically)?

And don't give me any of this Ali, Foreman or Frazier rubbish because those guys could barely even box!

I would say Norton was more stiff but technically better on offense than Arreola. Foreman would be to wide with the punches he did have better body punches than Arreola and jab,Frazier wasn't a technical anything other than a solid left hook, and ali wasn't a technical fighter outside of a really good straight right,he was an athletic one.


All in all I would say Arreola has better punches technically ,other than sloppy body shots, I would take Norton as the overall better technical fighter. Arreola to me is a small version of 90's foreman. Jimmy young/Holmes/Norton I would say were technically better.



I do think Arreola won his last fight. I think if you look at the punches being thrown by him they are technical, hes slow and off balance sometimes but when he sets up shots with footwork hes pretty good, I wouldn't rate him as a world beater in this era. Where the size advantage would have helped him in other eras in this one not really hes not the biggest and hes not the most skilled either. Fghting Arreola you get a sloppy and Technical; fighter all in one night,i think this makes him awkward to fight.

[billeau2]

Peter is a Super-Frazier, simply better in every way imaginable than Joe.

Arreola technically blows Frazier out of the water..

In fact, prior to the 80's, no fighter as technically good as Arreola ever existed...

Ken Norton for instance, who beat Ali 3 times to nothing in reality, was nothing more than a piss weak, poor mans version of Seth Mitchell, who Arreola annihilated in 1 round!

You are free to your opinion but facts are facts mate.

Ok Elroy your right so since you are right you should be able to describe specifically what it is about these two fighters that make them technically so much better. I mean specifically so even the 99% of the population who cannot see the light can understand...

So go ahead and enlighten me.

[billeau2]

When considering the best training and the technical profiency of fighters, things change for professional fighters. A different standard applies... For example, the difference between mastering a roundhouse and the mastery of a round kick that superfoot wallace has/had as a fighter.At the professional level, one can certainly be a rule changer...

Getting back to Superfoot for example, most martial artists would not throw a round kick, preferring a roundhouse at the very least because of the lack of power (French foot boxers excluded!) but...Superfoot never needed anything but his left leg because of how he developed his kicking technique. His training, strategy and virtually everything else he did made it so that he could win with his round kick.

By using Superfoot it can take one out of the usual modes we get into regarding the way fighters train and win. It shouldn't matter if one lifts, climbs, or swims, as long as they can perform and not be exploited due to fatigue...Technical proficiency should be, likewise, based upon not having a major weakness that can be exploited and being succesful in the ring.

The problem with saying Chris Aerolla is technically adequate is that this standard does not help at the top level. At this level if a fighter loops a punch it should be a conscious decision and the proof should be that this fighter does not pay for it as a loss. For example, madianna being akward gave Floyd a hard time, much more so than if he had a perfectly straight punch.

When a fighter is succesful and bends the rules then there should be a roadmap that shows how the fighter achieves such...So lets take, as Juggy does Norton and Aereola: because both guys are way above the simple understanding or how to throw a jab, etc, there should be some hints as to how and why they choose to do things a certain way, a clue to their deliberation. With Norton there are some obvious clues: Norton used a type of guard that one can see used as far back as the 1800s, and popularized by Archie Moore. This allowed him to protect his jaw, rush in and do damage. This allowed him to capitolize as a puncher.

With Aeriola I never saw much deliberation in this respect. Was Chris trying to be a puncher? could he have used more mobility? certainly he could throw a punch well, perhaps better than some...but there was never any unifying technical points that made him a real threat to be reckoned with. Compare this to a guy like Golata who was on the whole much more methodical a puncher. Golata liked to go inside and punch to the body and often used his jab to get there (when he wasnt being the dirty pole).

Peter is much the same as Aeriola. The most strategy i was peter employ was to work off his jab in the second Toney fight...he usually would otherwise slug it out and hope he punched harder than the other guy.

There is nothing wrong with a fighter deliberately throwing more efficiently, working less but working better, and training to that end. But frankly some of these guys, like Aeriola, while obviously able to throw punches well, do not seem to have a grasp of deliberate, effective means of employing method and technique. Vlad Klitsko by comparison can be said to employ a basic but effective strategy of working off his jab to set up his punches. Its an obvious strategy that one can see employed and until someone has an answer to it, Vlad can rightly say, "if it ain't broke don't fix it."

[Scott9945]

Ok so many limit weight boxers still run SOME distance but you will find that that is mainly for a WARM UP...

Which brings me to another point..

What used to constitute a boxers ENTIRE training regime in the past, is TODAY only about 1/3rd of it.

Sometimes guys even had to work back in the day whereas today it is there JOB to train all the time.

Even little Manny Pacquiao at Welterweight consumes 8000cal a day during training, an amount difficult for even a big man to eat on average.

The main point with the running thing is not trying to pick at examples of it not being true like a religious defender, it is the recognise clearly and obviously that the overall trend has shifted from distance to intervals across the board!

Can you not see that?^^

That's because fighters used to fight six times a year instead of the 2-3 they do now. When you fight infrequently you need longer training camps. This is just simple logic. How many training camps do you think Harry Greb or Sam Langford had?