Could the heavyweight all-time ranking process completely change in 50-100 years?

[Ryn0]

What?? how do they have the best 3 resumes?? explain

Lewis has a nice resume but far from top 3..and neither Klit has even beaten 1 fighter who will ever see the hall of fame

I actually think Lewis resume is top 3, Wlad and Vitalis sits around the same quality as Tysons really. Maybe Wlads is slightly better because of the longevity and quality of guys like Povetkin/Haye.

I mean Holyfield, (old) Tyson, Tua, Rahman, Grant, Vitali, Golata, Briggs, McCall, Akinwande, Mercer, Morrison, Ruddock, Bruno. Makes for pretty reading.

[PainfromUkraine]

Some nice responses guys. While I agree that size alone does not make you great, it is surely a big advantage for any even good fighter. A good big man usually will beat a great smaller man, or at least the size will be a big help. Hell, some people say size does not matter, yet bash guys like Lennox and the Klitschkos for fighting 'undersized, shorter/outweighed' opponents and that's why they dominate.

Personally, it is hard to speculate for sure, as it is far in the future, BUT, it is possible that there will be two seperate lists IMO. This won't take away anything from the accomplishments of past greats, but it may be a better way of ranking these giants we get nowadays, and I suppose every future champ from now on or in the future will be a massive man like Wlad or Lennox. Very tough to imagine a smaller destroyer like Tyson.

Anyway, keep the responses coming people. I'll also set up a poll.

[LacedUp]

Some nice responses guys. While I agree that size alone does not make you great, it is surely a big advantage for any even good fighter. A good big man usually will beat a great smaller man, or at least the size will be a big help. Hell, some people say size does not matter, yet bash guys like Lennox and the Klitschkos for fighting 'undersized, shorter/outweighed' opponents and that's why they dominate.

Personally, it is hard to speculate for sure, as it is far in the future, BUT, it is possible that there will be two seperate lists IMO. This won't take away anything from the accomplishments of past greats, but it may be a better way of ranking these giants we get nowadays, and I suppose every future champ from now on or in the future will be a massive man like Wlad or Lennox. Very tough to imagine a smaller destroyer like Tyson.

Anyway, keep the responses coming people. I'll also set up a poll.

A good big man beats a good little man.

A good big man won't beat a great little man. However, guys like Lennox or Wlad are a step above good, and it can be argued how many great smaller me they've faced in my opinion.

[PainfromUkraine]

A good big man beats a good little man.

A good big man won't beat a great little man. However, guys like Lennox or Wlad are a step above good, and it can be argued how many great smaller me they've faced in my opinion.

Really depends on what you define good and great. If we even forget about the top top fighters and think about the division as a whole, i'm just saying that in terms of contenders and just in the division, if you have a small man who is probably a bit better than a still-good big man, the big man will usually win because of his size and the advantages that can bring, if used correctly.

[LacedUp]

Really depends on what you define good and great. If we even forget about the top top fighters and think about the division as a whole, i'm just saying that in terms of contenders and just in the division, if you have a small man who is probably a bit better than a still-good big man, the big man will usually win because of his size and the advantages that can bring, if used correctly.

I disagree wholeheartedly.

Look at Eddie Chambers. Dude is a relatively small heavyweight with good skills. A lot better skills than the average heavyweight nowadays but not with the biggest punch. He's been beating bigger, respected guys for years. He beat guys like Dimitrenko for example. If Ustinov hadn't ducked him, I'd bet he'd beat him too. Those are average at best though, and Eddie is a good small man.

but if a small man has better skills than the larger man, I'd take him to win more often than not and they often do.