The Myth of bigger Heavyweights part 2

[them_apples]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p33bQCojtc

6 ft 10 275.

let's see some more, since it's obviously a new age Gimmick and a sign that the HW division is weak whenever it get's ruled by size kings.

[Elroy The Great]

all things being equal, except size, the bigger man usually wins.

[OctoberRed]

all things being equal, except size, the bigger man usually wins.

Unless you match a David Haye with a Valuev.

[Elroy The Great]

Unless you match a David Haye with a Valuev.

valuev.....our generations carnera.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Sometimes I wonder if the cruiserweight division has caused this.

I mean, cruiser came along in the 80s and very very few big men ever did much before that. And by big I mean like 6'6 and up. You had Carnera who reigned for a very short time and was considered one of the worst ever.

The 200 range guys could do some damage. Holyfield was on top and he came from cruiser. Moorer did quite well and came from light heavy.

Who knows how Usyk would do there? With his skills, he could shake things up. Adamek came up and did quite well before Vitali. It would be interesting if these cruisers were heavys. The big boys might fall quickly.

[Elroy The Great]

Sometimes I wonder if the cruiserweight division has caused this.

I mean, cruiser came along in the 80s and very very few big men ever did much before that. And by big I mean like 6'6 and up. You had Carnera who reigned for a very short time and was considered one of the worst ever.

The 200 range guys could do some damage. Holyfield was on top and he came from cruiser. Moorer did quite well and came from light heavy.

Who knows how Usyk would do there? With his skills, he could shake things up. Adamek came up and did quite well before Vitali. It would be interesting if these cruisers were heavys. The big boys might fall quickly.

shuddap, bro.

how ya doin, doe

[Tony Trick-Pony]

shuddap, bro.

how ya doin, doe

I'm making it, brother.

When you say a good big man beats a good little man, that's typically true.

What about a good little man versus a big bum doe?

[Elroy The Great]

I'm making it, brother.

When you say a good big man beats a good little man, that's typically true.

What about a good little man versus a big bum doe?

a bigger guy could always resort to leaning on a peewee. if a guy is a real bum, they will fnck that up too.

mike beat up his bigger bums.

[Willy Wanker]

Sometimes I wonder if the cruiserweight division has caused this.

I mean, cruiser came along in the 80s and very very few big men ever did much before that. And by big I mean like 6'6 and up. You had Carnera who reigned for a very short time and was considered one of the worst ever.

The 200 range guys could do some damage. Holyfield was on top and he came from cruiser. Moorer did quite well and came from light heavy.

Who knows how Usyk would do there? With his skills, he could shake things up. Adamek came up and did quite well before Vitali. It would be interesting if these cruisers were heavys. The big boys might fall quickly.

Besides 105 and 108, Cruiserweight is probably the division I have the least interest in.

I would like to see some Cruisers move up and try their luck at Heavyweight. People put so much emphasis on size. Bowe, Lewis and the Klitschkos are the only 6'5"+ I would consider very skilled.

I think if Holyfield, Tyson, and Moorer were prime today, they would be champions. Joshua is no Lennox Lewis and Wilder isn't a Klitschko.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

a bigger guy could always resort to leaning on a peewee. if a guy is a real bum, they will fnck that up too.

mike beat up his bigger bums.

LOL

Mr. Tyson did that better than most. I think he'd clean the division out now- at least the killer young version when he got da video game deal and ****.