If HWs today are so much better because of size than...

[Elroy1]

Absolutely.

And that's the logic behind weight classes , it's about weight percentage.
That's why you have bigger 'jumps' the higher you go .

Super Flyweight is 115lbs, Bantamweight 118lbs , while the difference between Junior Welterweight and WW is already considerably higher (7lbs).

A 112 lbs fighting a 122lbs has a weight disadvantage of almost 10% while a 185 lbs fighting a 195 lbs only has a 5% ratio.

Of course it doesn't matter for some Klit fanatics, Pianeta would knock Frazier out in 5 because he is bigger and taller

I agree with "weight percentages"

10 lbs to a lightweight is huge compared to 10lbs as a heavyweight of course. But what we see here is striking differences, entire weight classes of 15-25lbs in some instances. That's a different story.

Neither me or any of my colleagues are arguing with size alone. In the light of being completely broken down you all just resort to focussing on 1 aspect of what was said instead of looking at the whole picture.

Size, skills, athleticism...

On average, it's all better. How could it be otherwise!?

Frazier would not even be allowed to compete at boxing today because he was partially blind. Who could he beat today? Nobody. Case rested!

[Elroy1]

I wouldn't even call myself a Klittard. I am fan of many boxers. I do like them and really respect their skills obviously.

But if there's one thing I have noticed it's that almost everybody who does so seems to apply reasonable very well thought out logic to their opinions, they don't SOUND like raving lunatics.. Why is that you reckon?

[bklynboy]

I agree with "weight percentages"

10 lbs to a lightweight is huge compared to 10lbs as a heavyweight of course. But what we see here is striking differences, entire weight classes of 15-25lbs in some instances. That's a different story.

Neither me or any of my colleagues are arguing with size alone. In the light of being completely broken down you all just resort to focussing on 1 aspect of what was said instead of looking at the whole picture.

Size, skills, athleticism...

On average, it's all better. How could it be otherwise!?

Frazier would not even be allowed to compete at boxing today because he was partially blind. Who could he beat today? Nobody. Case rested!

There's one more thing to factor in - after a point the human skull doesn't protect the brain from an impact. If stick your head out into the road and you're hit by a little mini cooper or an 18-wheeler - it doesn't make a difference. You're dead both ways (Obviously) even though the difference in mass between the two vehicles is tremendous.

How does that apply to boxing? At a certain point it doesn't matter how big you are - your skull is not going to protect your brain from the impact. You could be 6'3" and weigh 210 or 6'6" and weight 240. (And fat and muscle doesn't help cushion the blow to the head). You could be 6'9", built like Mike Tyson and weigh 320 pounds but the blow to your head would knock you out the same way as if you weighed 220.

And certainly putting on fat doesn't help so Ray Mercer coming in at 240 v LL didn't help him absorb head shots (as opposed to coming in at 210).

Does weight help? Of course. It helps you absorb body shots, it helps you wrestle and push off and lean on the other guy. It helps in clinches. But after a point it doesn't help in absorbing a head shot.

EDIT:

One more thing. Neck muscles do help cushion the blow. So. If you compare two 6'9" 320 lb boxers and one is fat and the other is built like Mike Tyson, with Mike Tyson like neck muscles then yeah (genetics aside) the Mike Tyson type guy can take a better punch.

What are the weird genetics? I don't know. Your skull has more mass, the way your brain is attached to the spinal cord leads to less concussions; or the padding and fluid is such to protect the brain better than the avg person. Whatever.

[Elroy1]

There's one more thing to factor in - after a point the human skull doesn't protect the brain from an impact. If stick your head out into the road and you're hit by a little mini cooper or an 18-wheeler - it doesn't make a difference. You're dead both ways (Obviously) even though the difference in mass between the two vehicles is tremendous.

How does that apply to boxing? At a certain point it doesn't matter how big you are - your skull is not going to protect your brain from the impact. You could be 6'3" and weigh 210 or 6'6" and weight 240. (And fat and muscle doesn't help cushion the blow to the head). You could be 6'9", built like Mike Tyson and weigh 320 pounds but the blow to your head would knock you out the same way as if you weighed 220.

And certainly putting on fat doesn't help so Ray Mercer coming in at 240 v LL didn't help him absorb head shots (as opposed to coming in at 210).

Does weight help? Of course. It helps you absorb body shots, it helps you wrestle and push off and lean on the other guy. It helps in clinches. But after a point it doesn't help in absorbing a head shot.

I mostly disagree with this point.

I say mostly because your last line had some truth in the sense that if a boxer of similar relative natural size put on increasing amounts of fat in order to increase his chin (i.e. on the head, face and neck) he would sacrifice all his other attributes, be unable to walk let alone box. I have always been talking about boxers fit enough for elite performance in pro boxing with some extra chub, not obese boxers with clear training and performance issues.

But your analogy doesn't hold when it comes to all around growth. Bone, muscle, fat and organ growth together you know.

Your analogy with the cars represents 2 cases, both of which are sufficiently capable of destroying the head completely, the impact difference is different, but by nowhere near the difference of either of them to the object being crushed (the skull).

The chin it makes intuitive sense also goes up in a percentage scale, just as punch power would. The 30 lb difference between a 1970 HW and a 2010 HW provides more than a noticeable protection. It can be seen clearly analysing populations of boxers that as a boxers opponents weight goes up, his own chin qualities against them diminish (he is at higher risk of KO) and his punch power too (he does not score as many or easy KO's).

This is just an indisputable fact mate. The relative percentage scale was a relevant point. But trying to apply the "once you get to 200lbs or 175lbs weight doesn't matter" business isn't true.

Naturally larger people have thicker skulls, bigger organs, more fat, muscle, connective tissue etc etc.

Skills are most important. If that were not the case then newbies would be able to beat veterans, obviously that's not the case.

But aside from that.. The 2 most measurable things that are important are WEIGHT, and EXPERIENCE.