Were Patterson and Ingo the worst heavyweight champs ever ?

[Rusty Tromboni]

Liston was outclassed by a man who weighed as little as 201.5 pounds in his prime and started his career at light-heavy, hardly much more than a cruiserweight.

And Liston himself weighed 199 in a fight and stood around 6'. Not really a giant, he had a good reach but how much of that reach comes from his wide shoulders ? Mayweather has a 72 inch reach while Wlad has a 81 inch reach but their arms are the same length. I only have a 75 inch reach but my arms are longer than Bryant Jennings who has the same reach as Liston. Vitali has a 79" reach but his arms are longer than Rahman (82" reach)

Do you rate Liston higher than Dempsey, Marciano, Louis and Spinks ? At 21 years of age Deontay Wilder weighed 195 pounds, do you think Liston would beat him ?

Liston's best win was Patterson, a man who became champion by feeding on Marciano's leftovers.

Quarry would actually have a chance against liston, he beat Shavers and Lyle, who were similar to Sonny.

Fitzsimmons beat Dunkhorst who was as big as Valuev and probably was more skilled. By KO1.

Look at a Liston-Patterson and tell me they belong in the same ring together.

That's not to mention the other big boys who had arrived.

I really don't know if Quarry could beat Liston. Liston's jab was terrific. It really decided a match. I don't doubt that smaller men could beat him. I just wouldn't bet on it. If Quarry fought the smart fight, he might out point him. But Liston was leagues better than Shavers and Lyle. Not even a close comparison.

With Sonny's arrival a 190 lb. weight division was ready. Remember, I come from Wrestling, so I see how these weight divisions work. It's different, maybe Boxing doesn't need as many divisions, but the original 8 clearly missed a few.

[Dempsey19]

Look at a Liston-Patterson and tell me they belong in the same ring together.

If they don't it's because of quality. The size difference between 198 pound 6'0" Patterson and 204 pound 6'0" is definitely not enough to merit a higher weight division. Mike Tyson beat men who outweighed him as easily as Liston beat Patterson.

Do you think Dempsey and Willard belong in the same ring together ? Using Dempsey as an example you can say the smaller man has an advantage. Louis, Dempsey and Ali all had their toughest fights against smaller men. Arguably the Klitschkos too. Chris Byrd and Corrie Sanders are easily their best wins by a country mile and they both beat the other Klitschko brother !

If you see, Chris Byrd and Wlad 1, both men evenly matched, blow for blow, do you think that thse 2 men don't belong in a ring together ?

[QueensburyRules]

Do you think Dempsey and Willard belong in the same ring together ? Using Dempsey as an example you can say the smaller man has an advantage. Louis, Dempsey and Ali all had their toughest fights against smaller men. Arguably the Klitschkos too. Chris Byrd and Corrie Sanders are easily their best wins by a country mile and they both beat the other Klitschko brother !

- -Sanders a big boy, 6-4, 230 and a quick starting, fast handed southpaw so one helluva punch

Only incrementally smaller than the Ks yet bigger than most heavy champs.

[billeau2]

Great insights.

I think what you're saying is very true. If you have any chance at becoming Heavyweight Champ, you should take it. (foster, and maybe Moorer never had a chance, they were after money). As you've mentioned before, once fighters hit a certain weight, there's a lot of parity. Hell, even Toney, who lacked any serviceable power even at Middleweight, made greater waves at Cruiserweight and Heavyweight than he did at Light Heavyweight. People forget Byrd started as a Middleweight because his career before Heavyweight was meaningless. Clearly, Toney and Byrd were never the world's best Heavyweight, but it shows for the dearth of of talent and ability among the big boys.

Can you imagine a feather-fisted Lightweight dethroning a Middleweight? Napoles was lost against Monzon and Whitaker hit his ceiling against Trinidad.

As for Tunney, he actually seems to have been a natural Heavyweight. He cut his career short, but I believe the reports that he was improving. I also believe the argument that the defensive fighter we saw against Dempsey was a more recent invention: that he had evolved from more of a slugger. Who knows what 5 more years might have yielded, but I think Tunney was similar to Charles and Spinks in that he was always a Heavyweight waiting to happen.

The Bolded: Yes that is the "catch." so to speak. It seems that there is a certain limit to how much size helps a person before it becomes prohibitive. Its similar to the reasons why a very well muscled individual, in incredible physical condition should, hypothetically be able to "move" his body proportionally to a small guy with a light build when it comes to running...But we know that this is not so when it comes to running long distances.

Great points I agree... In a way if a guy can fight lighter weight, punchers, and other assorted technically gifted guys at middle, he should be able to grow into heavyweight and make it work. Tunney showed this...He was able to fight competitively with Greb on several occasions. He then was able to of course fight Dempsey. With Michael Spinks, one has to appreciate certain mitigating factors. Tyson, given his record and his later performance was not considered a great heavy by many. However as has been said here and is known, Iron Mike matches up well against any heavyweight in history.

So I cut Spinks some slack with that fight. NO matter how good you were, Tyson at his sweet spot could, like Dempsey, end it really quickly if you could not figure out how to back him up.

[Dempsey19]

The Bolded: Yes that is the "catch." so to speak. It seems that there is a certain limit to how much size helps a person before it becomes prohibitive. Its similar to the reasons why a very well muscled individual, in incredible physical condition should, hypothetically be able to "move" his body proportionally to a small guy with a light build when it comes to running...But we know that this is not so when it comes to running long distances.

Great points I agree... In a way if a guy can fight lighter weight, punchers, and other assorted technically gifted guys at middle, he should be able to grow into heavyweight and make it work. Tunney showed this...He was able to fight competitively with Greb on several occasions. He then was able to of course fight Dempsey. With Michael Spinks, one has to appreciate certain mitigating factors. Tyson, given his record and his later performance was not considered a great heavy by many. However as has been said here and is known, Iron Mike matches up well against any heavyweight in history.

So I cut Spinks some slack with that fight. NO matter how good you were, Tyson at his sweet spot could, like Dempsey, end it really quickly if you could not figure out how to back him up.

2 points-

1. Dempsey himself started out at welter. Even Ali started at light-heavy. Most of the great heavies wold weigh under the cruiserweight limit in their early fights. Why at age 21, Wilder weighed 195 ? Also, I've seen photos of Gassiev and Klitschko together and Gassiev is hardly dwarfed. If he connects with Klitschko's chin, I do see Klitschko going down. Of course it could be argued that Gassiev is a bit of a weight bully and should really be fighting at heavy but he was beaten wasn't he ? That too by Usyk who lost to Shawn Porter in the amateurs at middleweight !

2. Spinks was getting on in years and had 2 bad knees by the Tyson fight and Tyson was in his absolute prime. And it was his only loss ! It could be argued he lost the Holmes rematch but that was ****iness more than anything else. I don't think Spinks would match up badly at all against Mike Tyson at the same age. Tyson was the same age during the Botha fight, and the commentators in that fight were calling him a shot fighter. I wouldn't at all be surprised if a 32 year old Spinks would beat a 32 year old Tyson. Spinks also has wins over superheavyweights and Mike, even in his prime, never looked that hot against superheavies. You could see he had trouble against a much larger man's clinch against Bonecrusher and really rangy jabbers against Douglas, and Lennox. Cus also had doubts about him beating Foreman, who was more of a semi-superheavy than a superheavy. Spinks' defeat of Holmes is a better win than anything on Mike's recrd.

[Dempsey19]

- -Sanders a big boy, 6-4, 230 and a quick starting, fast handed southpaw so one helluva punch

Only incrementally smaller than the Ks yet bigger than most heavy champs.

More like 220 and chubby. He had a short reach too, Height may have been exaggerated.

He did weigh 230 when old and fat but so did all the old-timers- Johnson, Louis, Ali, Frazier, etc. Even Antonio Tarver weighed around that in his twilight years.

A man his size would be recommended to cut down to cruiserweight if he was starting his career today.

He is as much smaller than the Ks as Patterson was compared to Liston and people on this thread are making that out to be a colossal difference.

He is smaller than any of the current Top 10 at heavyweight in at least one measurement.

[Dempsey19]

Underneath all that fat, Andy Ruiz Jr. is probably just a lightheavy or maybe a particulary large supermiddle. Marciano weighed almost 260 after he retired and he looked much slimmer and in better shape than Ruiz jr, does now.

Tyson Fury is carrying around a lot of fat too.

[Dempsey19]

There are 2 men who turn the size matters phenomenon on their head- Bob Fitzsimmons and Billy Conn.

Even Andre Ward beat a man who beat both Usyk and Deontay Wilder.

The moment in recent history during which the whole good man beats little man phrase was repeated most often was in the run-up to Pacquaio vs De La Hoya, And we all know what happened there.

Ossie Occasio went the distance with Lennox Lewis.

One thing is for sure, the modern 200 pound Cruiserweight division is pointless, Wilder is proof of this.

I wonder what this sub is going to say come December when Anthony Joshua will weigh in at 210 pounds !

[billeau2]

2 points-

1. Dempsey himself started out at welter. Even Ali started at light-heavy. Most of the great heavies wold weigh under the cruiserweight limit in their early fights. Why at age 21, Wilder weighed 195 ? Also, I've seen photos of Gassiev and Klitschko together and Gassiev is hardly dwarfed. If he connects with Klitschko's chin, I do see Klitschko going down. Of course it could be argued that Gassiev is a bit of a weight bully and should really be fighting at heavy but he was beaten wasn't he ? That too by Usyk who lost to Shawn Porter in the amateurs at middleweight !

2. Spinks was getting on in years and had 2 bad knees by the Tyson fight and Tyson was in his absolute prime. And it was his only loss ! It could be argued he lost the Holmes rematch but that was ****iness more than anything else. I don't think Spinks would match up badly at all against Mike Tyson at the same age. Tyson was the same age during the Botha fight, and the commentators in that fight were calling him a shot fighter. I wouldn't at all be surprised if a 32 year old Spinks would beat a 32 year old Tyson. Spinks also has wins over superheavyweights and Mike, even in his prime, never looked that hot against superheavies. You could see he had trouble against a much larger man's clinch against Bonecrusher and really rangy jabbers against Douglas, and Lennox. Cus also had doubts about him beating Foreman, who was more of a semi-superheavy than a superheavy. Spinks' defeat of Holmes is a better win than anything on Mike's recrd.

Green K given, excellent points. Generally speaking on a the posts you made you describe a lot of different variables involved with actual weights. I tend to see it that way as well.

[GhostofDempsey]

Leon Spinks gets my vote.