Would a middleweight be able to pull this off?

[Marchegiano]

I've seen statistical comparisons of the relative size of top class modern athletes and those of previous eras in a variety of different sports. The top sprinters, swimmers, football (soccer) players, rugby players, tennis players, are all, on average, bigger now than at at any time in the past.

Yes shifting more of your own mass involves more effort. But if you are using your own mass to shift something - or somebody - else, then the more more mass you have, the less effort is required.

In the case of boxers, taking punches from your opponent drains you of energy just as much, if not more, than throwing punches. The harder the punches, the more they take out of you, and the bigger the opponent, the harder he will hit you. And, of course, wrestling, shoving, and resisting being shoved around in clinches is also more tiring if your opponent is bigger than you.

Jim Jeffries and Jack Johnson were arguably the 2 greatest ever unlimited rounds champions. Both were considered to be invincible, in their primes, and both were unusually big men for their era. Jeffries was 6' 1.5" 225lbs, Johnson was 6' 2" and around 210lbs, in his prime.

Johnson was known as "The Galveston giant" because athletic men of his size were comparitively rare back then. He could probably have made CW if he was fighting today!

My contention is that if guys of Johnson and Jeffries size had been as common in the unlimited rounds era as they became in the 60s and 70s, there would have been more of them winning world HW titles.

The guy who eventually beat Johnson, also over unlimited rounds, was Jess Willard, who was 6' 6" 235lbs. Willard was thought of as a genetic freak, a one-off anomaly, in his era.

Again, I contend that if guys of Willard's size had been as common back then as they are today, then the CW division would have had to be introduced 100 years earlier, to give little fellas like The Galveston Giant a fair chance of becoming world champions!

Moving on through history, Primo Carnera, 6' 5" 270lbs, was the next HW champ who would qualify as a "giant" by modern standards. He was hyped to the heavens till he lost. But retrospectively, the general consensus opinion on his reign is that he basically had nothing going for him except sheer size and strength, compared to his contemporaries.





I've no idea what 3,000 year history you are referring to here, and I had to look up kinesiology to know what it is. "The study of human movement". Or, "Applied kinesiology muscle testing is a bizarre alternative medicine method of diagnosis and prescription .." Whichever you prefer.

I honestly don't see how that can answer the question under discussion here. But I believe I can answer it, from my own direct personal experience. I'm a former competitive boxer with over 50 amateur fights and many years experience sparring different sized opponents, amateur and pro, from featherweights to heavyweights.

I can assure you that, as a MW, sparring HWs was considerably more gruelling and energy sapping than sparring LWs or WWs. And that was only sparring!

If I said that to anyone with either practical or theoretical knowledge of boxing itself, the reaction would be something along the lines of .. "Yes, of course. What else would you expect?"

I also repeat something I said in a previous post. The first weight divisions in boxing were introduced in the 19th century, during the unlimited rounds era. There were only 2, to begin with. Lightweight and Heavyweight. LW was anything up to either 154 or 168, depending on where the fight took place. HW was anything over.

The reason why those divisions were introduced was that everybody connected to the sport realised that a smaller man was handicapped in a fight with a bigger opponent, and they wanted to reduce the size dispararities involved.

I rest my case.

Yep, that shift happens relatively late in sporting history doesn't it? About 2-1/2 to 3 thousand years after the point of inception.

Why?

The next paragraph is just...I dunno what to tell you son. Are you ****ing with me? More mass requires less effort? You at least, the very least, have a surface level understanding of what E=MC2 is meant to mean.

In the third paragraph you are applying modern boxing to past situations. I mentioned flopping for a reason. You can't pound a man who is flopping, you can clinch him either....or maybe you can. Maybe you are the special magic giant who did not evolve into a superior being but just has magic reaction timing that's superior to every human who ever tried the sport....but for them rest of mankind the reason you have such a long period when giants were less successful is because men that size were not in a sport that was fair to them.

then you move into actual characters. JJ and Jeffries both come from a time when defense was new to white america. Marciano is unbeaten and undersized and comes from a time when defense is well known and highly practiced.

Primo Carnera was the installment of fascists. Did youse seriously never pick up how boxing reflects politics? When the Irish-American audience is biggest we has Irish-American champion. Queen Vic's Diamond Jubilee? Need us a Commonwealth champ huh? Thanks Bob. The year Canada was grabbing up land and claiming the 20th century would be Canadian also so a Canadian champion....all of this was the most natural and uncorrupted turn of events man has ever seen.

Primo's team done told on him, the sanctioning bodies that existed back then done came clean about their dirty doings. It isn't Primo you should mention as the giant of the 30s. That's George Godfrey. The black man who whooped Primo something terrible, and then DQ'd himself out to get paid because Primo fights fixed fights. That whole era is about bringing black men to Europe to pad European records with European coin.


Well I'm clearly not an alternative medicines quack, bubba I thought you done knew I make prosthetics.

You don't see how the study of human movement can explain how and why bigger people have more stamina problems? Jesus ****ing murphy son, if you don't think the study of human movement explains stamina what the **** do you believe does? That's really, really silly. Think about the **** you said to me...in text...right there or all the world to see....that was just dumb bud.

We've all boxed in our youth. You're again applying modern sport, meaning rules that did not exist back when big men were not so successful, to a time period where it does not fit. Are you the MW or HW in this I was an amatuer trip down memory lane? Did you flop? Of course you didn't. How many KDs does it take to end a fight today? Even without a 3 KD rule how many do you think you could get away with? Hundreds? Alright then son, different time then innit? **** changed then didn't it? Maybe how you goes abouts playing in this new sport is different....maybe. Roll my ****in' eyes kind of maybe.


Of the two of us, I am the only one who can explain the history of weight division...The **** are you doing spouting what you assume at me?



So if I have you correctly, you do not believe a MW can hurt a HW because:

1, The average size of athletes didn't really start to take shape until the 1960s.....and that's evidence in your head for a capability that was always there no matter what kind of rules.

2, The physics and biochemistry of the human body does not explain energy consumption of the human body...god knows what you're thinking with that.

3, Mass reduces required energy to cause velocity. what the **** is that?

4, In modern boxing weight divisions make things fair ... which you seem to believe translates to ancient and bare knuckle despite knowing nothing about either.


And finally the everyone knows bull****. Yes, i am fully aware of mouth breathing cro-magnon opinions coming from people who would not know how to educate themselves if you told them the exact field of science they need to be looking into...I am fully aware rather than looking into actual science boxing fans love to propagate bull**** that's incredible unscientific while claiming some level of scientific understanding. Sweet science indeed son. Got life experiences that mean more than thousands of years of history or modern science. That is called cognitive dissonance, you're looking for the evidence you want not the evidence in front of you.

[kafkod]

Mmmm. Yeah. I was reflecting on the idea that different training methods and fight strategies might allow the window to be pushed further as I wrote the little essay above... but y'know if I started including every tangent my brain throws up I'd never get a damn thing finished..

Course it kinda remains clear that there is such a thing as 'too big' and almost certainly 'too small' to compete at the top level, the question that remains is whether a longer fight would perhaps favour a guy of 6'3" and 220 say over a guy of 6'6" and 250 all else being equal. You're reckoning that the longer fight plays into the hand of the bigger guy and I ain't so sure. So much unfortunately is down to the individuals in boxing, and even if you when you get a fight like Joshua vs Parker you'll never be able to extrapolate to, say, Joshua vs Usyk, or to a greater extreme how either would look at 15+ rounds.

You mention the 'perceived wisdom', and I'm getting exactly what you mean... as it applies to the smaller weight classes (as in Canelo Khan and Brook GGG for instance), but what I'm trying to explore is the point at which that rule breaks down... either in terms of fight length or fighter size. Are HW champions going to continuing increasing in average size? And if not, what exactly will be the limiting factors? We gonna see more 7' Champs (though it's less likely now because certainly in the US average height in the male population appears to have reached or even passed it's peak and in other parts of the world is slowing). And would this trend continue should we return to 15 or 20 round fights or would it be reversed to a degree?

I can't see how 15 or 20 round fights would benefit smaller HWs over bigger. It would just give the bigger man more time to wear the smaller man down and more opportunities to land a big shot and win by KO. A big guy can plod around a ring for just as long as a smaller guy can dance around it. Especially if the smaller guy's punches are not taking as much out of him as vice versa, which is usually the case.

It does look like the height increase in developed countries has levelled out and we are probably at the summit now. Better nutrition can't trump genetics, and genetically, the human race hasn't changed significantly in 50,000 years.

If that's so, then the average height of top HW's won't increase much more from now on. Unless all those 7 foot tall, freakishly athletic US basketball players I keep hearing about here decide to stop chucking balls through hoops and learn how to box instead.

One possibility is that, with more advances in S&C training - and maybe new, undetectable PEDs - we could see an era when the HW division is dominated by incredible hulks like BB Miller.

[kafkod]

Yep, that shift happens relatively late in sporting history doesn't it? About 2-1/2 to 3 thousand years after the point of inception.

Why?

The next paragraph is just...I dunno what to tell you son. Are you ****ing with me? More mass requires less effort? You at least, the very least, have a surface level understanding of what E=MC2 is meant to mean.

In the third paragraph you are applying modern boxing to past situations. I mentioned flopping for a reason. You can't pound a man who is flopping, you can clinch him either....or maybe you can. Maybe you are the special magic giant who did not evolve into a superior being but just has magic reaction timing that's superior to every human who ever tried the sport....but for them rest of mankind the reason you have such a long period when giants were less successful is because men that size were not in a sport that was fair to them.

then you move into actual characters. JJ and Jeffries both come from a time when defense was new to white america. Marciano is unbeaten and undersized and comes from a time when defense is well known and highly practiced.

Primo Carnera was the installment of fascists. Did youse seriously never pick up how boxing reflects politics? When the Irish-American audience is biggest we has Irish-American champion. Queen Vic's Diamond Jubilee? Need us a Commonwealth champ huh? Thanks Bob. The year Canada was grabbing up land and claiming the 20th century would be Canadian also so a Canadian champion....all of this was the most natural and uncorrupted turn of events man has ever seen.

Primo's team done told on him, the sanctioning bodies that existed back then done came clean about their dirty doings. It isn't Primo you should mention as the giant of the 30s. That's George Godfrey. The black man who whooped Primo something terrible, and then DQ'd himself out to get paid because Primo fights fixed fights. That whole era is about bringing black men to Europe to pad European records with European coin.


Well I'm clearly not an alternative medicines quack, bubba I thought you done knew I make prosthetics.

You don't see how the study of human movement can explain how and why bigger people have more stamina problems? Jesus ****ing murphy son, if you don't think the study of human movement explains stamina what the **** do you believe does? That's really, really silly. Think about the **** you said to me...in text...right there or all the world to see....that was just dumb bud.

We've all boxed in our youth. You're again applying modern sport, meaning rules that did not exist back when big men were not so successful, to a time period where it does not fit. Are you the MW or HW in this I was an amatuer trip down memory lane? Did you flop? Of course you didn't. How many KDs does it take to end a fight today? Even without a 3 KD rule how many do you think you could get away with? Hundreds? Alright then son, different time then innit? **** changed then didn't it? Maybe how you goes abouts playing in this new sport is different....maybe. Roll my ****in' eyes kind of maybe.


Of the two of us, I am the only one who can explain the history of weight division...The **** are you doing spouting what you assume at me?



So if I have you correctly, you do not believe a MW can hurt a HW because:

1, The average size of athletes didn't really start to take shape until the 1960s.....and that's evidence in your head for a capability that was always there no matter what kind of rules.

2, The physics and biochemistry of the human body does not explain energy consumption of the human body...god knows what you're thinking with that.

3, Mass reduces required energy to cause velocity. what the **** is that?

4, In modern boxing weight divisions make things fair ... which you seem to believe translates to ancient and bare knuckle despite knowing nothing about either.


And finally the everyone knows bull****. Yes, i am fully aware of mouth breathing cro-magnon opinions coming from people who would not know how to educate themselves if you told them the exact field of science they need to be looking into...I am fully aware rather than looking into actual science boxing fans love to propagate bull**** that's incredible unscientific while claiming some level of scientific understanding. Sweet science indeed son. Got life experiences that mean more than thousands of years of history or modern science. That is called cognitive dissonance, you're looking for the evidence you want not the evidence in front of you.

You have managed to misunderstand and/or misinterpret every single point I made.

What 3,000 year history and what laws of modern science am I going against by saying that, all else being equal, a big man will be able to exert X amount of force with less effort than a smaller man?

That is a known empirical fact, and the reason why there are weight divisions in weightlifting and power lifting, as well as in boxing.

"JJ and Jeffries both come from a time when defense was new to white america." Is that some arcane peice of racial stereotyping that nobody outside the US knows about? Do you have any evidence to back it up?

"Primo Carnera was the installment of fascists." Again .. do you have any evidence to back that statement up?

Re the history of weight divisions in boxing .. I know my boxing history, and I've already told you that the first weight divisions were introduced in the 19th century, during the unlimited rounds era. And the reason they were introduced was that people involved in the sport, especially gamblers and bookies, realised that weight disparities gave an unfair advantage to the bigger man.

And finally, don't diss the Cro-Magnon's. They were probably the most intelligent, adaptable and recourceful human beings who ever lived. Did you know they were not only more physically robust, but also had significantly bigger brains than any present day human population?

[Citizen Koba]

I can't see how 15 or 20 round fights would benefit smaller HWs over bigger. It would just give the bigger man more time to wear the smaller man down and more opportunities to land a big shot and win by KO. A big guy can plod around a ring for just as long as a smaller guy can dance around it. Especially if the smaller guy's punches are not taking as much out of him as vice versa, which is usually the case.

It does look like the height increase in developed countries has levelled out and we are probably at the summit now. Better nutrition can't trump genetics, and genetically, the human race hasn't changed significantly in 50,000 years.

If that's so, then the average height of top HW's won't increase much more from now on. Unless all those 7 foot tall, freakishly athletic US basketball players I keep hearing about here decide to stop chucking balls through hoops and learn how to box instead.

One possibility is that, with more advances in S&C training - and maybe new, undetectable PEDs - we could see an era when the HW division is dominated by incredible hulks like BB Miller.

Ha we'll see I guess. I'm happy to keep an open mind on this issue. Like I mentioned earlier there's probably no other sport less susceptible to statistical analysis cos the routes to victory and the traits required to achieve them are so variable. I personally can't shake the intuition that guys who are too big are going to tire more quickly and more severely, and that guys who are not much smaller can still punch hard enough, but I also ain't gonna ignore the fact that the trend for bigger guys is showing no sign of abating.