Old Timers vs The New Blood

[Boogie Nights]

the Heavyweights

it's an interesting subject due to the whole weight differential alone

i decided to come up with this thread because i've noticed a lot of debates going on, particularly about david haye vs ali, louis, and other all time greats. but it's not just about David haye, it's the whole cocept of comparing today's big men to the past era's big but smaller men.

to me personally, i'd always go with old school, all the way. however given the weight disparity it makes me wonder at times.

today there are very few conditioned big men. you can almost count them on your fingers. the first heavyweight fighter that comes to mind is obviously klitschko. a big, strong, tall, muscular, broad-shouldered athletic man with a devastating punching power. minus the chin, it does raise questions how smaller heavyweights like marciano, louis, dempsey (really lean heavies, cruisers today) could compete with such big men. and we're talking about a really proportioned size, not just fat, or a deceiving physique, but really big fit men. even guys like peter who scale 250 pounds, or rahman, or tua, how can they be matched against guys like marciano, 180 pounds? it wouldnt be allowed.

you really have to pay respect to great old time fighters, because they build this sport on their great performances and superb warrior showings. but we also have to take into consideration how other great fighters in smaller weight classes move up in weigth and come up short in their victories, due to the obvious factor: the size of the other fighter.

i would favour Muhammad Ali against any other big guy because ali was already a modern heavyweight, not as big as some of the fighters today, but decent at 6'3, 210-215 pounds. and he didnt rely on power in his fights.

i want to know the opinions of other boxing fans on what is the whole deal about this. a fighter like Joe Louis, an all time great, was an exceptional fighter, but how would he deal with guys like tyson, lewis, and klitshko. Louis, Dempsey both at 6'1, maybe another generous plus inch, 200 pounds, dempsey lower in weight, marciano, 5'10 180 pounds, joe frazier 5'11, 208 (we've seen what happened to Joe when he tasted the power of a truly, powerful, modern heavyweight in Foreman) and the rest of the smaller fighters against today's heavies.

work ethic undisputedly would go to old timers. they treated boxing like their work not an entertainment million dollar show biz. but the disparity in power, and athletism, improved training of today's athletes? i think majority of old timers would fall a little short.

Thoughts???

[Ryn0]

The heavyweights actually aren't all that much bigger. Wlad, Vitali and Valuev are the only "Big heavyweights" Others like Chageav, Peters, Imbragimov and Maskeav are Fat simple as, They are around the same height and the standard older heavyweights but they carry fat on them. I am 100% positive that they could boil down to atleast 220-230 but because there is no pressure on them to do so as the Division is lacking in depth and that there is no upper limit in weight. Lennox Lewis was a well conditioned big heavyweight and in his prime would beat every single one of today's heavyweights. Joe Louis was a much smaller man than today heavyweight and still with the exception of Wlad perhap i believe he would KO all the top heavy's of today.

[Boogie Nights]

The heavyweights actually aren't all that much bigger. Wlad, Vitali and Valuev are the only "Big heavyweights" Others like Chageav, Peters, Imbragimov and Maskeav are Fat simple as, They are around the same height and the standard older heavyweights but they carry fat on them. I am 100% positive that they could boil down to atleast 220-230 but because there is no pressure on them to do so as the Division is lacking in depth and that there is no upper limit in weight. Lennox Lewis was a well conditioned big heavyweight and in his prime would beat every single one of today's heavyweights. Joe Louis was a much smaller man than today heavyweight and still with the exception of Wlad perhap i believe he would KO all the top heavy's of today.

interesting, but still be it fat or muscle, it's still a significant amount of mass to go up against. there's no question that they're fat, but they'd be a little hard to cope with when you're 220 going up against 250-260 pounder. they got a bunch of linebacker fatties in the NFL and not all of them are necessairly muscular. in clinches and just the leverage that extra poundage might play a difference against a smaller guy.


also what about Frazier was he not fat? guys like tua, chagaev, and others you mentioned looked no worse than joe. i mean with all due respect to frazier, he was a warrior, but in similarity of tyson's style he didnt have the physique or iron mike. he was conditioned but chunky even at a low 200 pounds. jerry quarry a tough guy also carried some love handles around his waist, im sure the're more, just cont think of any at the moment.

[Boogie Nights]

i need your input on this

[Sugarj]

Good man, terrific thread!

Yes I've thought about this alot too, if theres one thing that having all these weight divisions shows us, its that a good big un beats a good little un (Trinidad vs Hopkins, De La Hoya vs Hopkins, Winky Wright vs Hopkins.........bit of a pattern emerging here!! Ha ha) . It would be wrong to say that the heavyweights historically are the exception to the rule.

Todays cruiserweights rival the sizes of yesterday's heavyweights, in weight, reach, height. I truely think that a cruiserweight like David Haye or O'Neil Bell could mix in the company of the heavyweights of a few decades ago and may beat some former heavyweight champions and lose to others.

Legends like Dempsey, Tunney, Louis, Marciano, Patterson and Frazier's 'ring' weight would not have been far from todays cruiserweights, some a little lighter too. I dont doubt that Dempsey, should he have been matched against the likes of Wladimir Klitchko might well attack with his customary enthusiasm (as he did with the huge Jess Willard or Luis Firpo) but frankly I'd bet on Klitchko. Dempsey would struggle with the reach and strength of Wladimir and would more than likely be reduced to swinging and missing.......much like Igraminov (hope I spelt that right!) a few weeks ago.

Joe Louis was awesome in his day, ahead of his time! But the big men he fought, like Abe Simon and Buddy Baer were not in the league of Lewis, Bowe, either Klitchko or Ibeabuchi. You only have to watch Max Schmelling blast right hands consistently into Louis's face or watch Billy Conn attack him with two fisted conbinations to realise what a bigger, heavier man with a longer reach and harder punch could have done to Louis. The best large heavyweights of the last two decades have had the athleticism, pace and most importantly speed of punch too. Rid**** Bowe vs Joe Louis..............no way is Joe avoiding Bowe's right hands and no way is Louis KOing Bowe, his chin in the early 90s was cast iron and he fought at an amazing pace, certainly in the first Holyfield fight. For that matter, the first Bowe vs Holyfield match is a perfect example of a true legend, albeit smaller guy losing to good (but not all time great! ) big guy at their respective peaks.

As has already been mentioned, watch Frazier being KO'd by Foreman and you have to say that any of the modern guys mentioned in the above paragraph would have a fair chance of doing the same. Historically things start to get a bit unsure for me with the likes of Ali, Foreman and Holmes. These guys at their best did not weigh too much more than today's cruiserweight, but their vital statistics such as reach (circa 82 inches) and height (6,3 6,4) would not make them severely disadvantaged against today' super heavy. Ali and Holmes had superb speed and amazing ability to defend against and avoid punches thrown by fast punchers such as Patterson, Ellis, Witherspoon and Weaver. I dont doubt that they would mix well with today's super heavyweights. They also had very high punch rates per round and over a greater match distance. The Thriller in Manilla and Holmes vs Norton are two spectacular examples of this!

Foreman and Holmes acquitted themselves well in world class matches, two decades after their respective peaks I think this proves their worth. It would, however be churlish to suggest that the heavyweights in twenty years time would have lost to fighters of this calibre. They may well average 7 feet tall, 300 pounds and 90+inches reach whilst being fast and in good shape.....who knows?

[TheGreatA]

also what about Frazier was he not fat? guys like tua, chagaev, and others you mentioned looked no worse than joe. i mean with all due respect to frazier, he was a warrior, but in similarity of tyson's style he didnt have the physique or iron mike. he was conditioned but chunky even at a low 200 pounds. jerry quarry a tough guy also carried some love handles around his waist, im sure the're more, just cont think of any at the moment.

Frazier never had a 'ripped' physique but he still looked much better than many of today's heavyweights.



Frazier fought against Foreman in 1976 (half-blind and old), weighed nearly 230 lbs and did very well (going 3 more rounds than in 1973) without losing much of his speed, just conditioning.

You have to remember that guys like Ibragimov (220 lbs), Chagaev (230 lbs) and Peter (250 lbs) fight at their natural weights.
Frazier weighed naturally like 220-230 and dropped 20 lbs before a fight so he could go 15 rounds without tiring.


Jerry Quarry


Frazier vs Chuvalo, showing much more speed and movement than many of today's HW's.


Old, injured and half-blind Frazier (230 lbs) vs George Foreman, still showing the head movement.

[Boogie Nights]

Good man, terrific thread!

Yes I've thought about this alot too, if theres one thing that having all these weight divisions shows us, its that a good big un beats a good little un (Trinidad vs Hopkins, De La Hoya vs Hopkins, Winky Wright vs Hopkins.........bit of a pattern emerging here!! Ha ha) . It would be wrong to say that the heavyweights historically are the exception to the rule.

Todays cruiserweights rival the sizes of yesterday's heavyweights, in weight, reach, height. I truely think that a cruiserweight like David Haye or O'Neil Bell could mix in the company of the heavyweights of a few decades ago and may beat some former heavyweight champions and lose to others.

Legends like Dempsey, Tunney, Louis, Marciano, Patterson and Frazier's 'ring' weight would not have been far from todays cruiserweights, some a little lighter too. I dont doubt that Dempsey, should he have been matched against the likes of Wladimir Klitchko might well attack with his customary enthusiasm (as he did with the huge Jess Willard or Luis Firpo) but frankly I'd bet on Klitchko. Dempsey would struggle with the reach and strength of Wladimir and would more than likely be reduced to swinging and missing.......much like Igraminov (hope I spelt that right!) a few weeks ago.

Joe Louis was awesome in his day, ahead of his time! But the big men he fought, like Abe Simon and Buddy Baer were not in the league of Lewis, Bowe, either Klitchko or Ibeabuchi. You only have to watch Max Schmelling blast right hands consistently into Louis's face or watch Billy Conn attack him with two fisted conbinations to realise what a bigger, heavier man with a longer reach and harder punch could have done to Louis. The best large heavyweights of the last two decades have had the athleticism, pace and most importantly speed of punch too. Rid**** Bowe vs Joe Louis..............no way is Joe avoiding Bowe's right hands and no way is Louis KOing Bowe, his chin in the early 90s was cast iron and he fought at an amazing pace, certainly in the first Holyfield fight. For that matter, the first Bowe vs Holyfield match is a perfect example of a true legend, albeit smaller guy losing to good (but not all time great! ) big guy at their respective peaks.

As has already been mentioned, watch Frazier being KO'd by Foreman and you have to say that any of the modern guys mentioned in the above paragraph would have a fair chance of doing the same. Historically things start to get a bit unsure for me with the likes of Ali, Foreman and Holmes. These guys at their best did not weigh too much more than today's cruiserweight, but their vital statistics such as reach (circa 82 inches) and height (6,3 6,4) would not make them severely disadvantaged against today' super heavy. Ali and Holmes had superb speed and amazing ability to defend against and avoid punches thrown by fast punchers such as Patterson, Ellis, Witherspoon and Weaver. I dont doubt that they would mix well with today's super heavyweights. They also had very high punch rates per round and over a greater match distance. The Thriller in Manilla and Holmes vs Norton are two spectacular examples of this!

Foreman and Holmes acquitted themselves well in world class matches, two decades after their respective peaks I think this proves their worth. It would, however be churlish to suggest that the heavyweights in twenty years time would have lost to fighters of this calibre. They may well average 7 feet tall, 300 pounds and 90+inches reach whilst being fast and in good shape.....who knows?

some good points. i agree, and i've always maintained that one should never underestimate the size of the talented giant. guys like valuev are similar to what primo carnera was in the joe louis era and we saw how that ended. guys like wlad or lewis, or tyson on the other hand are forces to be rekoned with, and would be dangerous in any era. do i think tyson is better than max baer, max shmeling, joe walcott, jess willard, george carpantier, and more advanced and scientific than gene tunney? yes i do, bigger, stronger and more skilled. do i think wlad or lennox would beat a tough but tiny in comparrison marciano? yes i do. rock is in the history books with 49-0 record and one of my favourite fighters, but guys of the modern era mentioned above werent in that time period. had they been there history might have been reversed. and this can go in debate round and round.

i do think that heavies in the past paid more attention to conditioning, came better prepared, tougher and much more durable without tiring as much. many of the old timers i feel would beat a handfull of today's talented big men, and even if they were to loose, im quite sure they would give a good account of themselves.

[Boogie Nights]

Frazier never had a 'ripped' physique but he still looked much better than many of today's heavyweights.



Frazier fought against Foreman in 1976 (half-blind and old), weighed nearly 230 lbs and did very well (going 3 more rounds than in 1973) without losing much of his speed, just conditioning.

You have to remember that guys like Ibragimov (220 lbs), Chagaev (230 lbs) and Peter (250 lbs) fight at their natural weights.
Frazier weighed naturally like 220-230 and dropped 20 lbs before a fight so he could go 15 rounds without tiring.


Jerry Quarry


Frazier vs Chuvalo, showing much more speed and movement than many of today's HW's.


Old, injured and half-blind Frazier (230 lbs) vs George Foreman, still showing the head movement.

agree frazier was a lion. also when talking about natural weight we can debate on that. first it's true that if chagaev, povetkin, or chambers, ibragimov made an effort to condition themselves they might very well strip their fat down to cruiserweight division with solid hard body structure.

i saw frazier's picture when he was about 230 pounds, and he was plain fat in that pic. i'd say he had about 60% fat of the whole body, and guys like ibragimov, or chagaev looked much better at 230 or 220 than he did at that weight. joe was a tremendous warrior and he did slim down to better his conditioning however it was very neccessary for him to take that weight off, otherwise he would never become champion. guys like sultan, and chagaev at 230 still had the goods to make champions at this weight, against mediocre opposition of course. id give points to joe because to become champion he had to fight guys like ali, then defend against a monster like foreman. not guys like shannon briggs, or valuev. this shows the warrior quality in joe.

but that still doesnt answer the question. i hold the opinion that as tough as joe was he'd still get knocked out against likes of wlad, lewis or tyson. possibly even against a guy like ray mercer who was no slouch.

that of course doesnt all go for frazier, that's for every other great little big man. it's hard to imagine competition. toughness is one thing, but to go up against strength you need more than toughness.

[Ryn0]

interesting, but still be it fat or muscle, it's still a significant amount of mass to go up against. there's no question that they're fat, but they'd be a little hard to cope with when you're 220 going up against 250-260 pounder. they got a bunch of linebacker fatties in the NFL and not all of them are necessairly muscular. in clinches and just the leverage that extra poundage might play a difference against a smaller guy.


also what about Frazier was he not fat? guys like tua, chagaev, and others you mentioned looked no worse than joe. i mean with all due respect to frazier, he was a warrior, but in similarity of tyson's style he didnt have the physique or iron mike. he was conditioned but chunky even at a low 200 pounds. jerry quarry a tough guy also carried some love handles around his waist, im sure the're more, just cont think of any at the moment.

Frazier was never particularly toned but you could tell it wasn't fat, World strongest man contest usually feature men with large abs that look fat but really there abs thicken so that they can lift more without damaging there own abs. That is what Frazier has done to an extent, whereas Peters, Toney and Chagaev have **** and are fat.
That cannot bo good for there stamina, Someone like Louis, Ali etc, could go the entire 15 without tiring and you cannot accuse Louis of not having power. IF some of today heavyweight's shaved off that fat and became much more athletic I think they'd be able to punch harder, last longer (better stamina) and just be all around better fighters.

[LondonRingRules]

some good points. i agree, and i've always maintained that one should never underestimate the size of the talented giant. guys like valuev are similar to what primo carnera was in the joe louis era and we saw how that ended.

** What, Primo being ignored by idiotic IBHOF voters while McGuigan, Sharkey, Ingo, Cuevas, ect waltz in?

Thanks for mentioning Primo as I got to update my record evaluation. At the time of his last title fight, Primo is the heavyweight record holder of most wins, 78, just edging Big George with 76. Primo, like Valuev, promoted as a freak show in his day, and like Valuev, became a pretty good fighter.

As far as comparison of eras, boxing suffers greatly because it's fallen to fringe sports status and has no Bill James as in baseball to figure out ways to rank disparate eras. So typically, a swearing match ensues between old salts and modern fan boys. Also typically, people tend to rank the fighters they saw when both fans and fighters in their primes. Older fighters dismissed as too primitive and newer fighters dismissed as too soft. Human nature.

Ali highly touted by moderns, but might be following the David Haye route today as his best weights were around 210 at his exile, meaning he could dehydrate down to 200 for weigh in and rehydrate in 2 days time to fight as cruiser and then move into heavy ala Haye.

What has happened mainly is fights limited to 12 rds with heavies using 10oz gloves, compared to 8oz in Ali's day, 6oz in Louis/Dempsey days, and something like 3oz in Jeffries day. So it becames a different fight in the ring with different strategies and KDs become more important in stoppages and scoring. Dempsey, Louis, Ali could beat many of today's big'uns, but they would be hard pressed to wage their whole careers facing guys who are now averaging 230 like Wlad is competing against compared to the 190lb fighters in their day with similar success. I'm thinking Byrd vs Wlad/Ibeabuchi and Sultan/Wlad where Sultan and Byrd tricky, clever boxers in good shape, beat plenty of big fighters, but lost out to talented big fighters.

At the end of the day, most confuse legacy with fantasy. Bob Fitz is absolute legend, but does anyone seriously think he can go against Lewis or Wlad and knock them out for his belt? Same with Rocky. Ali really struggled against southpaw Mildenberger, so what is a bigger stronger southpaw like Sultan going to do to him? Ali not big and strong enough to dominate him as Wlad did. It becomes heresy to suggest a no name could beat a legend, but Ali wasn't always looking sharp in the ring which is how he got the Liston fight to begin with. Is Primo's career tainted any more than Ali's with fixes as another example?

I think not, but Primo unjustly downgraded for fighting on while a sick man, and had to bear the burden of being accused of killing a man in the ring, just as Charles, Willard, and Baer had to do. Stuff like that affects a fighter in a negative way.

When was the last time a 190-200lb fighter became the pride of the heavies? Joe Frazier and Holy at their bests around 205 to fudge it, Byrd around 210 and looking a little pudgy, Ali 205-215 at his best. The last legit 200lbers seem to be Louis and Walcott.

Many more 200lbers in the global pool to compete at heavy today than 240lbers IF they could. Not even sure if Americans even rank in the division anymore, which is why we see all these comments disparging Lewis, Klitschkos, and the other east Euros. New era requiring new strategies and not enough understanding or appreciation. Frazier/Quarry a nice fight and damn shame we can't match them against Haye as a benchmark. Guess we'll just have to be happy we're in the video age and can see this stuff to maybe make a more educated discussion, a rarity on this forum. I was just trolling for Pac/JMM video and got interrupted, so thanks.