........back in the early 1900s. Only one I know of was jess Willard who was 6,6, surely there were giants walking about back then, why dint they take up boxing and smash up guys like Marciano.
-
-
Basically because there were not a lot of 6'6 people walking around in those days.Originally posted by likeamulekick View Post -
this^^^^^^^^^^^^^Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
no other way to explain it,,,
it wasnt till the late 60's that you started seeing all these huge heavys
remember jou louis was barely 200 pounds,,, today he would be a cruiser
evolution i guessComment
-
probably not evolution as it most likely has slowed down on account of the unfit no longer dying before procreating because of wellfare also evolution dosen't work that fast. A more probable cause is better nutrition.Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View PostComment
-
Jack Johnson's nickname was the Galveston Giant, he was 6'1. There's your answer. Primo Carnera was 6'6 too, though he lost to Max Baer, Joe Louis, and Jack Sharkey.Originally posted by likeamulekick View PostComment
-
Whilst there has been a gradual increase in the size of heavyweights over the decades, there have always been huge guys campaigning in world class;
Fulton, Willard, Carnera, Abe Simon, Buddy Baer, Ernie Terrell, Gerry Cooney......to name a few. Its just that their smaller contemporaries were usually better!
For all that the last 20 years have dealt us Lennox Lewis, Rid**** Bowe, Valuev and the Klitschkos....is it really realistic to say that they'd have beaten the likes of the better smaller heavyweights? I've got a feeling that prime Louis, Liston, Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson and Holyfield would all do rather well head to head/prime for prime. Obviously Holyfield did well against Bowe and Lewis......Comment
-
(1990) Back then all the "tall guys" were playing basketball!!!
Marciano fought in the early 1950s your about 50 years off!!!!
How much attention to you guys need? Between you and tommo2 this place is turning into a boxing nursery of moronic questions!
If your looking to troll and get a rise why not visit a local gym and step in and start talking **** like you do here! I quarentee someone will set you straight...........and fast too!
Ray
Comment
-
early 1900s meaning 00-50, black and white boxing, u know what I mean u tit. Hey, common man im not as worse as Tommo, that guys more ****** than you.Originally posted by Ray Corso View Post(1990) Back then all the "tall guys" were playing basketball!!!
Marciano fought in the early 1950s your about 50 years off!!!!
How much attention to you guys need? Between you and tommo2 this place is turning into a boxing nursery of moronic questions!
If your looking to troll and get a rise why not visit a local gym and step in and start talking **** like you do here! I quarentee someone will set you straight...........and fast too! Ray
p.s, get a spoon and FEAST on my arseComment
-
Originally posted by likeamulekick View Post
....lack of nutrition?????
....gene pool???? Shot people having *** with other short people equal......more shot people?
.....they were in the circus??
Comment
-
Ok some reasons.
1/ People were on average shorter in the past of course so they were fewer and farer between the giants and the population was also smaller too.
2/ In the interwar and post war years the gene pool had been limited, all the physically able men were killed at war leaving diminutive specimens like Moore, Marciano, Walcott, Charles etc to prevail.
3/ Taller boxers in the past like Abe Simon, Buddy Baer, Primo Carnera etc were not subject to the same modern specific training as giant boxers are today. They did not acquire the balance necessary to become a technical boxer like Lewis, Klitschko or even like Grant or Fury. They were absolute oafs and could be beaten by much smaller guys like Louis!
Historically 6'2" average was optimum for a HW boxer. It is only in the last 20 years that 6'5"-6'7" has become regarded as the more desirable.Comment
Comment