When a fighter moves up in weight

[IronDanHamza]

It doesnâÂÂt mean nothing. It doesnâÂÂt determine the outcome of a fight though

and on this forum its always the weight and size

nobody seems to notice the billions of information available to counter this argument. It happens every year.

Who has made that argument?

[Bronson66]

Weight isn't always the deciding factor in boxing. Smaller fighters like Pacquiao, Armstrong, and Roy Jones have proven that skill, speed, strategy, and conditioning can overcome size advantages. While weight classes were created for fairness and safety, they are also driven by the pursuit of titles and money. A 15-pound or even 5-pound difference often doesn’t matter as much as the fighter’s heart, strategy, and preparation. Historically, smaller fighters could defeat bigger ones by fighting smart and using their strengths, not just relying on brute force.

Jones added weight each time he jumped a division,he went from174 lbs to193 to fight Ruiz.Likewise Manny went from122lbs up to146lbs ,why do you think they did that if weight wasn't a significant factor?

[them_apples]

Who has made that argument?

Bronson

[them_apples]

Weight isn't always the deciding factor in boxing. Smaller fighters like Pacquiao, Armstrong, and Roy Jones have proven that skill, speed, strategy, and conditioning can overcome size advantages. While weight classes were created for fairness and safety, they are also driven by the pursuit of titles and money. A 15-pound or even 5-pound difference often doesn’t matter as much as the fighter’s heart, strategy, and preparation. Historically, smaller fighters could defeat bigger ones by fighting smart and using their strengths, not just relying on brute force.

Smart person spotted

[Bronson66]

Bronson

My argument is every fighter who has successfully gone up to a higher division has added weight to do so.Now tell me why that is?
Why did
Haye
Holyfield
M Spinks
Charles
Moore
Alvarez
Usyk
Ellis
Patterson
Duran
Moorer
ETC
All deliberately add weight to their frames?

Weight is not the determining factor but, all other factors being equal , it is a very important one.
A 200lbs plus heavyweight is big enough for anyone,if he is good enough,but a lightweight at that divisions weight, going against a middleweight,all other things being equal, is facing a severe disadvantage.
If this were not so, weight classes would be unnecessary!
That seems to be common sense to me.

[IronDanHamza]

Bronson

Where?

[Mr Mitts]

Just say there are limits to the statement weight doesn't matter. Just say for any particular matchup the range of these limits change, which is more like it, more realistic. Make any great fighter with the right style big enough and he will beat a fellow ATG he was even with at the original weight. A mythical Robinson vs Pep at welterweight, would see a a wee bit slower Willie who only punched as hard for a welterweight as he did for a featherweight, which was kinda light. I do not see that portending well for Willie. Same if Robby goes to feather. He will be a real hard hitting feather and a bit faster than as a welter. I see him beating Willie either way. Indeed Pep is seldom ranked above prime Robby P4P.

But if you take Willie to heavyweight--about 6 feet 1 inch and weighing around two hundred lbs.--he will have only about two bits less punch than Ali himself and be at least as fast as him. I should think he would handle Robinson fairly routinely at those dimensions.

[Marchegiano]

Check how time changes affect weight bud.

You'll see, the entire era when man did not put a scheduled end to fights small men felt no need to put on weight. In fact some of our most loved p4p figures, look at their resume, you'll see guys like Fitzs put on weight for smaller men and weigh less for larger. Because with no time limit boxing is its most fair.

As time limits come in weight divisions get more rigid. You see less and less men being under weight.

By the time of the 15 rounder a MW could still fight at HW and do well but the days when a stand out WW could hang with HWs were over. The time of the 15 rounder is not the rise of the 220+ average HW.

By the era of the 12 rounder MWs now found it hard to be successful at HW. There were still 190 HWs, it wasn't the weight or changes to weights in divisions that stopped MWs from being cagey HWs, it was time limits.

Now with the 12 rounder firm hws are about 260 and fighting less and less 12 rounders.

This should be considered more often and to a higher degree when talking about specific fighters on p4p. What Roy did is physically more difficult than what Fitzsimmons did. Fitzs has the much better HW resume. There are reasons for this and they are found in time. Not weight divisional history alone. Weight division and time together.

[Bronson66]

Check how time changes affect weight bud.

You'll see, the entire era when man did not put a scheduled end to fights small men felt no need to put on weight. In fact some of our most loved p4p figures, look at their resume, you'll see guys like Fitzs put on weight for smaller men and weigh less for larger. Because with no time limit boxing is its most fair.

As time limits come in weight divisions get more rigid. You see less and less men being under weight.

By the time of the 15 rounder a MW could still fight at HW and do well but the days when a stand out WW could hang with HWs were over. The time of the 15 rounder is not the rise of the 220+ average HW.

By the era of the 12 rounder MWs now found it hard to be successful at HW. There were still 190 HWs, it wasn't the weight or changes to weights in divisions that stopped MWs from being cagey HWs, it was time limits.

Now with the 12 rounder firm hws are about 260 and fighting less and less 12 rounders.

This should be considered more often and to a higher degree when talking about specific fighters on p4p. What Roy did is physically more difficult than what Fitzsimmons did. Fitzs has the much better HW resume. There are reasons for this and they are found in time. Not weight divisional history alone. Weight division and time together.

Fitzsimmons fought just one fight to the finish fight,against Jim Hall in1890.

Sixty seven of his fights were 4 rounders and 7, 3 rounders
Which fighters, weighing 160lbs did well against heavyweights of any class over 15 rds?
I can only think of Langford.

[Marchegiano]

Fitzsimmons fought just one fight to the finish fight,against Jim Hall in1890.

Sixty seven of his fights were 4 rounders and 7, 3 rounders
Which fighters, weighing 160lbs did well against heavyweights of any class over 15 rds?
I can only think of Langford.

I don't understand where you think the conflict lies. I used Fitzs as an example of a man who weighed more at MW than he did HW. You are not dis*****g that. Leaves me confused.

Langford should be enough for the point to be made buddy. If it is a human limitation then there are no exception. How many people do you know can fly? Okay. That's a real human limitation. You admitting Lang was a good 160 in the 15 round era is you admitting there is no physical or biological reason a 160 man can't do well over 15 rounds against men around the 200s.

You'd have a real ****ing hard time saying MWs can't fight at HW if we had a MW fighting at HW right now wouldn't you? Given it's been a long time since we've seen one you're able to say where are they. Admitting a time where there is no where are they is all my post asks of you and you did that. Should I need a plethora?


I'm not trying to be a ****, but I'm going to be direct as I can. IMO, there is no argument here.


Mention Fitzs's weight changes in a post mostly about time and all of a sudden Fitzs is an example of a fighter without time limits. Um, gee man, I thought the time span I was covering was way longer than Fitzs's career and he alone can not be the crux of was there or wasn't there smaller men in the division.

In all reality I did not think I had to defend the idea that as you go backward in time men get smaller in this sport. Fitzs was not meant to be a reflection of that. Fitzs is just a name for someone to look up to see what I mean about weighing more at lower weights than they do at heavier weights.





Fitzs also fought something like 30 debuts. Does that mean small men were not more prevalent during a time when fight times were longer?


Dempsey's era is chalk full of MWs and LHWs at HW. Does this mean small men were not more prevalent during a time when fight times were longer?


I like Langford too. I also like some Ganses and Norfolk ... ... ... none of which did "well" at hw? Exactly bro, we can all bring up **** that's besides the point and act like it isn't.