1963 Henry Cooper vs 1988 Evander Holyfield

[billeau2]

I'd argue that is unfair. That's like saying Hearns was a better Welterweight than everyone not named Robinson, simply because he fought all the way up to Cruiserweight.

I mean, would you consider him a better Welterweight than Leonard?

Holyfield out-grew cruiserweight. He also fought in an era absent of drug testing. He was Boxing's Larry Bonds. I wouldn't pick him to beat Tunney, Dempsey, Charles or Marciano. But I wouldn't pick them to have the heavyweight success Holyfield had - not against every opponent he beat/took to the final bell.

I meant it more tongue in cheek. Every weight class is different though Rusty: we have to remember that what applies to welter might not apply to cruisers. As a general principle, if this was not true, then we wouldn't have a different build for a long distance runner as compared to a sprinter... After all, even though the sprinter has more muscles, he also has more horsepower and should be able to deal with the extra weight as proportional right? But it does not work that way.

If we look at 135 and below, the rarest quality one can find is power. Even though it should not matter, because it is all proportional, we still see more power in the higher divisions. It just does not work that way though...and any great lightweight fighter would love a magic button to unleash a heavyweight style one punch on their opponent instead of the constant back and fourth that takes place in that division.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I meant it more tongue in cheek. Every weight class is different though Rusty: we have to remember that what applies to welter might not apply to cruisers. As a general principle, if this was not true, then we wouldn't have a different build for a long distance runner as compared to a sprinter... After all, even though the sprinter has more muscles, he also has more horsepower and should be able to deal with the extra weight as proportional right? But it does not work that way.

If we look at 135 and below, the rarest quality one can find is power. Even though it should not matter, because it is all proportional, we still see more power in the higher divisions. It just does not work that way though...and any great lightweight fighter would love a magic button to unleash a heavyweight style one punch on their opponent instead of the constant back and fourth that takes place in that division.

If you meant it tongue and cheek, fine. But usually that is exactly the opposite of what anyone means. Fighters mature physcially. Walker and Robinson are thought of as Welterweights, but did their best work as Middleweights. Like Hearns (who was also a Middleweight, but could never replicate his success after 147), they're KO ratio dropped off, but their level of competition increased.

It's true that physics applies to fighters: a fighter like Wilder is almost unimaginable as champion below Cruiserweight, where as the smaller you make Fury, the better he gets. It's not ridiculous to call him the Heavyweight Division's answer to Willie Pep. Conversely, "Fighting" Harada - one of the absolute finest offensive fighters of all time - has a paltry 35% KO ratio, with less than half his wins ending in T/KO; where as Ali and Fury - both abysmal offensively - hover somewhere around 66%.

That being said, below 135 is where you find some of the BEST punchers ever:
Wilde
Gomez
McLarnin
Saddler
Arguello
Jofre
Kane
Canzoneri
McGovern
Zarate
Olivares
Marquez
Hamed
Rigondeaux

I'd put everyone of those men over Hearns as puncher. And each at least on par w/ Robinson for one-punch power/finishing ability.

Even Mayweather at 130 was a seriously skilled offensive fighter; granted he entered the ring ~140 lbs. But he was better offensively than anyone he himself faced at 140, 147, and 154 lbs.

There's a lot of fighters at the lower weights who were killer punchers. I am not disagreeing that it might take a few more of those punches to get the job done than it would if those fighters were carrying an extra 100 pounds into the ring, but they were big punchers none the less.

And a lot of that is probably owed to the fact that with a smaller population of humans to draw from, you're less likely to have as much talent. Not that those aren't some supremely talented men (Jofre, Gomez, Marquez and Rigo are 4 of the best ever captured on film), but you also get guys like Hamed. His shelacking at the hands of Barrera would have happened on the local circuit, not in a title fight, if he were a bigger man (that is, fighting in a more talent-laden weight class).

From Lightweight to Light Heavyweight, you're more likely to siphon off the less talented fighters before they ever become contenders because there are more fighters competing. Like Dempsey said, "to be champion you need to be able to throw a punch and take a punch". If that's not you, the more fights you fight, the sooner it will make itself clear.

[billeau2]

If you meant it tongue and cheek, fine. But usually that is exactly the opposite of what anyone means. Fighters mature physcially. Walker and Robinson are thought of as Welterweights, but did their best work as Middleweights. Like Hearns (who was also a Middleweight, but could never replicate his success after 147), they're KO ratio dropped off, but their level of competition increased.

It's true that physics applies to fighters: a fighter like Wilder is almost unimaginable as champion below Cruiserweight, where as the smaller you make Fury, the better he gets. It's not ridiculous to call him the Heavyweight Division's answer to Willie Pep. Conversely, "Fighting" Harada - one of the absolute finest offensive fighters of all time - has a paltry 35% KO ratio, with less than half his wins ending in T/KO; where as Ali and Fury - both abysmal offensively - hover somewhere around 66%.

That being said, below 135 is where you find some of the BEST punchers ever:
Wilde
Gomez
McLarnin
Saddler
Arguello
Jofre
Kane
Canzoneri
McGovern
Zarate
Olivares
Marquez
Hamed
Rigondeaux

I'd put everyone of those men over Hearns as puncher. And each at least on par w/ Robinson for one-punch power/finishing ability.

Even Mayweather at 130 was a seriously skilled offensive fighter; granted he entered the ring ~140 lbs. But he was better offensively than anyone he himself faced at 140, 147, and 154 lbs.

There's a lot of fighters at the lower weights who were killer punchers. I am not disagreeing that it might take a few more of those punches to get the job done than it would if those fighters were carrying an extra 100 pounds into the ring, but they were big punchers none the less.

And a lot of that is probably owed to the fact that with a smaller population of humans to draw from, you're less likely to have as much talent. Not that those aren't some supremely talented men (Jofre, Gomez, Marquez and Rigo are 4 of the best ever captured on film), but you also get guys like Hamed. His shelacking at the hands of Barrera would have happened on the local circuit, not in a title fight, if he were a bigger man (that is, fighting in a more talent-laden weight class).

From Lightweight to Light Heavyweight, you're more likely to siphon off the less talented fighters before they ever become contenders because there are more fighters competing. Like Dempsey said, "to be champion you need to be able to throw a punch and take a punch". If that's not you, the more fights you fight, the sooner it will make itself clear.

Best punchers indeed. Power being one aspect of a great puncher. Its not about greatness so much as about how physics actually apply.

[just the facts]

Holy field. One sided fight.

[Incapable]

Cooper gets beaten in 6by Holyfield, EH to powerful and a few steps above.

[uncle ben]

Cooper gets beaten in 6by Holyfield, EH to powerful and a few steps above.

This is what I think.