The heavyweight division is STACKED

[REDEEMER]

It is stacked and compared to the 90s and 00s, yes, it's way more competitive - but only if they fought as regularly and against each as they did in the 70s.

HW 70s era is better than any era before or after. And the Foreman vs 5 was an exhibition and bloody brilliant entertainment, unlike Mayweather Connor or Logan.

There were far less fighters and belts then .

[BangEM]

You’re right.

The bogeyman of the 90s, Ruddock, was flattened by a complete bum with over 20 losses.

Mercer who started boxing at 23 went life/death with Lennox Lewis and he should’ve won.

Two 45 yr olds in Foreman and Larry Holmes were top-10 in the 90s.

People love nostalgia but honestly, the 90 just look better because the level was poorer and defensively those guys blocked punches with their faces. Once you take Lennox and perhaps Holyfield out of the 90s - it was razor thin. All the other hypejob won’t get past Parker in this era.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Yeah man. I miss the days when that big slick Russian Valuev was a world champion.

Those were the days.

The heavyweight division has not really been great since the end of the 90's or early 2000's.

I don't really think the quality has changed much since the Kiltschko era.

But? Wladimir Kiltschko was a by far better champion than Tyson Fury for example 'Actually defended his belts'.

[PRINCEKOOL]

It is stacked and compared to the 90s and 00s, yes, it's way more competitive - but only if they fought as regularly and against each as they did in the 70s.

HW 70s era is better than any era before or after. And the Foreman vs 5 was an exhibition and bloody brilliant entertainment, unlike Mayweather Connor or Logan.

Why is it stacked?

All the thread starter has done is name 11 fighters.

You could do that with any era.

The heavyweight division is competitive due to their being very few fighters, who are levels apart from each other 'That is precisely what makes this era great'.

But in terms of ability? I don't think this era is great. I have no idea why people are trying to make out that all of these fighters are genetic marvels.

Most of them are ether slow, lack power or are just big basic fighters 'Because they are super heavyweights, certain people get carried away'.

[Earl-Hickey]

You’re right.

The bogeyman of the 90s, Ruddock, was flattened by a complete bum with over 20 losses.

Mercer who started boxing at 23 went life/death with Lennox Lewis and he should’ve won.

Two 45 yr olds in Foreman and Larry Holmes were top-10 in the 90s.

People love nostalgia but honestly, the 90 just look better because the level was poorer and defensively those guys blocked punches with their faces. Once you take Lennox and perhaps Holyfield out of the 90s - it was razor thin. All the other hypejob won’t get past Parker in this era.

Exactly.

People act like 1990-1999 was full of Tyson vs Bowe vs holyfield vs Lewis type match ups as well which it obviously wasn't, there were good fights scattered in sure but there was also a ton of "why is he fighting that guy" going on and the top guys avoiding each other. Its purely nostalgia for the most part.

[Earl-Hickey]

Why is it stacked?

All the thread starter has done is name 11 fighters.

You could do that with any era.

The heavyweight division is competitive due to their being very few fighters, who are levels apart from each other 'That is precisely what makes this era great'.

But in terms of ability? I don't think this era is great. I have no idea why people are trying to make out that all of these fighters are genetic marvels.

Most of them are ether slow, lack power or are just big basic fighters 'Because they are super heavyweights, certain people get carried away'.

Can you tell me which ones are slow, lack power and are basic and I'll run some comparrison.

[TMLT87]

Better era than the Klitschko era as far as entertainment value, maybe about the same in terms of quality. Definitely worse than the 90s.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Can you tell me which ones are slow, lack power and are basic and I'll run some comparrison.

Most of them are basic accept Tyson Fury, even Anthony Joshua is basic to a certain extent 'But he is like a really dedicated student, who just memorizes the formula's and step by step processes to get a answer'. When I watch Anthony Joshua, you can see him going through the processes, he is not a fluid fighter.

I am not much motivated to carry on with this thread, you have done well to get to respond and engage.

I think I have said enough here today.

[GypsyTRAIN]

You have mentioned 11 fighters that is all you have done.

I disagree with the division being full of big athletic talent 'Most of them guys are ether slow with no power, or out of condition'.

You would not have to make this thread, if the division was so great.

The heavyweight division is competitive, but it is not a great era in terms of ability.

Note: It is still the best division in the sport currently now for me.

Deontay himself is 35 coming off a career changing loss. He's likely done and all he's shown for himself is that he twerks with another brother that has an OnlyFans. Should we expect to see Malik and Deontay OF exclusive videos soon ??!??

[BangEM]

Exactly.

People act like 1990-1999 was full of Tyson vs Bowe vs holyfield vs Lewis type match ups as well which it obviously wasn't, there were good fights scattered in sure but there was also a ton of "why is he fighting that guy" going on and the top guys avoiding each other. Its purely nostalgia for the most part.

Nostalgia makes people value the past than the present.

How good was Bowe apart from beating Holyfield? We all know what happened to him when he fought Golota. The same Golota was destroyed by Lennox Lewis in 1rd. But somehow Bowe is an ATG and I doubt Golota was better than Pulev (not as skilled and not on the same level in terms of IQ as Pulev).

Also, people tend to act like Holyfield wasn’t washed with heart condition when he beat Mike Tyson (the one-dimensional hypejob of the 90s). Holyfield already lost to Bowe twice and Moorer (the same Moorer that was flattened by 50-yr old Foreman) when he fought Tyson. So how good was Mike Tyson apart from beating bums and a light heavyweight in the 80s? And was the loss to Douglas really an upset since Tyson lost every time he fought someone decent or just a product of flash and hype?

The only critique about this era is that they don’t fight regularly and perhaps Wilder and Fury not fighting anyone whilst holding the division hostage (Bowe, Foreman and Holmes did the same thing in the 90s tbh). However, once you look past those two - you’ll see an AJ and Dillian Whyte - who keep fighting everyone (so there’s a balance). That’s basically why I ride for AJ the way I do (apart from knowing him) and Dillian Whyte because they’re both keeping the division alive. **** casuals and idiots would call it ‘fanboyism’ but if you’re a true fan of boxing, especially the HW division (the division that drives the sport) - you can’t hate those who’re keeping it alive by taking competitive fights. You’ve to be a muppet and a sentimental casual to do that.

The only era that was better than this era is the Ali, Foreman and Frazier. And it’s not because of how talented the era was (this era has more talents) - it’s because the fought one another and fought like 5 times a year. The 90s were the most overrated era. Apart from Lennox Lewis and perhaps Holyfield - none of them, including Tyson and Bowe, would win a belt in this era.