When was the last time a smaller man beat a good top ten ring magazine ranked larger man on points in a significant fight at heavyweight?

[Dr. Z]

LOL, another hit piece from the size queens conveniently disguised in moronic fashion. How about... What is the average weight of a top heavyweight contender? right now and over the course of history in the division. Top 5 heavyweights we have two under 230... Historically? In the last years there have been some exceptionally large champs, and some not so large... Holyfield, Tyson as opposed to Lewis, Vlad Klitsko... NBot really anything more than a trend as of yet... time will tell.

You can't define things like "small" etc because it shows an agenda. Rather, you use historical data. You take the weights of historical championed heavyweights and you look to see the following:

Is there an upward and steady increase in size? Is there a trend where larger fighters are winning? If so, how does it correlate? You have done none of these things. I doubt you could frankly.

I have defined super heavyweight with skills and listed the very good ones as Bowe, Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Tyson and Holy won 1 match of 7 vs super heavies with skills and the win was a fight that was very close.

Sure, 30 years isn't a trend. I used there history of 200+ fights, just one points loss is what I found. Is that enough of a correlation of you? Your obvisouly don't like my data so you must attack the source at all costs. I welcome feed back, but your not giving me any. Rather your agenda is showing.

[DeeMoney]

I think your criteria for what makes a small heavyweight is so limiting that it will dictate the answer to you. How many heavyweights over the past 30 years that make it within your criteria even get shots at those highly skilled super heavyweights?

[Dr. Z]

You put all these perimeters on this thread but fail to realize weigh ins today are a good 36 hours before a fight. This means most guys that aren't superheavyweights probably boil down in weight to have a bigger advantage in a lower weight class. Holyfield did it. Usyk did it. Countless other as well I'd bet. But it's certainly not impossible for smaller fighters to beat big skilled fighters as I've shown you.

You did not find any examples of the smaller man winning on points vs super heavyweights on points ( anyone can be Ko'd ) except for one name in the past 30 years. This is in all of Bowe's, Lewis', Klitschko, Klitschko and Fury's fights. That is a lot to look at! A large case study of 30 years.

I'm not saying a goon likely Valuev is in their class. He is not that skilled. So a smaller heavyweight who is very good can beat him on points.

Heavyweights weigh in the night before the fight do they not? Your not making any sense. No-- the advantage is size, height and reach it greatest at heavyweight, and not more in the lower weights.

To fighter develop the theory a bit further the much small man seems to be at a big boxing disadvantage if he facing a skilled super heavy with a world class jab. Maybe a great counter puncher like Toney can take advantage of being up against the odds ( facing a much bigger man with a long reach ). No wait a second he was out boxed twice by Sam Peter. You can used your one example of Holyfield who was a top counter puncher yet he won 1 fight is 5 vs Bowe and Lewis. And we know the score cards when with Byrd v the Kiitschko;s The were very one sided in three matches. Three examples here of excellent smaller heavyweight vs. skilled super heavyweights.

You can add to this research if you willing, but note I segment the Super heavies as follows.

Super heavies. Above 6'4", 225 pounds with a 79" reach. All the factors must be meet at the minimum.

1 ) The very skilled guys. Men with a great jab.

2 ) The moderately skilled guys, without anything great.

3 ) The unskilled goons.


Judge them as you will but note the main comparison is vs group #1 smaller men, 6'1 and under with a 75" reach or less and under 210 pounds give to take say 5 pounds. Again I do not consider Usyk at 6'3" 78 reach 221 pound man to be smaller as he does not fall within these parameters.

[billeau2]

I have defined super heavyweight with skills and listed the very good ones as Bowe, Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Tyson and Holy won 1 match of 7 vs super heavies with skills and the win was a fight that was very close.

Sure, 30 years isn't a trend. I used there history of 200+ fights, just one points loss is what I found. Is that enough of a correlation of you? Your obvisouly don't like my data so you must attack the source at all costs. I welcome feed back, but your not giving me any. Rather your agenda is showing.

Your data amounts to you setting a very specific set of conditions that are basically arbitrary, yet constrained, and passing them off as an indication of something significant.

And 30 years has nothing to do with it... it has to do with whom has taken home honors in the division during that time...

[billeau2]

Queenie has no honor, nor an honest bone in his Turd gobbling body.

I think its neat he is a fan of the OTHER big Russian.

[JAB5239]

You did not find any examples of the smaller man winning on points vs super heavyweights on points ( anyone can be Ko'd ) except for one name in the past 30 years. This is in all of Bowe's, Lewis', Klitschko, Klitschko and Fury's fights. That is a lot to look at! A large case study of 30 years.

I'm not saying a goon likely Valuev is in their class. He is not that skilled. So a smaller heavyweight who is very good can beat him on points.

Heavyweights weigh in the night before the fight do they not? Your not making any sense. No-- the advantage is size, height and reach it greatest at heavyweight, and not more in the lower weights.

To fighter develop the theory a bit further the much small man seems to be at a big boxing disadvantage if he facing a skilled super heavy with a world class jab. Maybe a great counter puncher like Toney can take advantage of being up against the odds ( facing a much bigger man with a long reach ). No wait a second he was out boxed twice by Sam Peter. You can used your one example of Holyfield who was a top counter puncher yet he won 1 fight is 5 vs Bowe and Lewis. And we know the score cards when with Byrd v the Kiitschko;s The were very one sided in three matches. Three examples here of excellent smaller heavyweight vs. skilled super heavyweights.

You can add to this research if you willing, but note I segment the Super heavies as follows.

Super heavies. Above 6'4", 225 pounds with a 79" reach. All the factors must be meet at the minimum.

1 ) The very skilled guys. Men with a great jab.

2 ) The moderately skilled guys, without anything great.

3 ) The unskilled goons.


Judge them as you will but note the main comparison is vs group #1 smaller men, 6'1 and under with a 75" reach or less and under 210 pounds give to take say 5 pounds. Again I do not consider Usyk at 6'3" 78 reach 221 pound man to be smaller as he does not fall within these parameters.

Holy-Douglas, Holy-Bowe, Holy-Foreman, Ibragimov--Briggs....all decision wins over top 10 fighters. Should I go on, or would you rather discuss the weakness of the era the Klits fought in since I truly believe you're trying to enhance them by setting all these parameters instead of realizing that yes, smaller fighter have won, and by decision over top 10 rated fighters. Or were all those guys bums? Seriously, I can go on as far far as you want to take this.

[Dr. Z]

Holy-Douglas, Holy-Bowe, Holy-Foreman, Ibragimov--Briggs....all decision wins over top 10 fighters. Should I go on, or would you rather discuss the weakness of the era the Klits fought in since I truly believe you're trying to enhance them by setting all these parameters instead of realizing that yes, smaller fighter have won, and by decision over top 10 rated fighters. Or were all those guys bums? Seriously, I can go on as far far as you want to take this.

You have already mentioned Holyfield name several times. I told you that Briggs wasn't ranked and he was older.

Again if you want to help me out here are the parameters.

Super heavies. Above 6'4", 230 pounds with a 79" reach. All the factors must be meet at the minimum.

1 ) The skilled big guy. Men with a great jab. I mentioned five and I really don't care for Fury, but the man can fight.

2 ) The moderately skilled guys, without anything great. AKA. Briggs and he was old. Don't pick the very old or very fat!

3 ) The unskilled goons.

You have one example of a smaller man beating a skilled big guy on points, just one and that is it in the past 30 years which is quite a case study! I think that is it. Yes-- I want your help finding the exceptions category two, and remember I am talking ( I'll lower the bar for you ) Smaller heavyweights 6'1" or under, 215 pounds or less and with equal to or less the a 76" reach.

Strike the matches when a guy was past their prime. I''ll give you credit as you can surely find more...not in tier one as it has been reached this is only one man, but in the uncharted field of category two, which will help my prove my overall theory. When the time is right, I'll put all of the above together in a new post.

I am eager to see what you come up with. I started the study in the 1990's. Giving you permission to go back to John L Sullivan. I suspect you'll find a few moderately skilled big guys now...Good luck.

[JAB5239]

You have already mentioned Holyfield name several times. I told you that Briggs wasn't ranked and he was older.

Again if you want to help me out here are the parameters.

Super heavies. Above 6'4", 230 pounds with a 79" reach. All the factors must be meet at the minimum.

1 ) The skilled big guy. Men with a great jab. I mentioned five and I really don't care for Fury, but the man can fight.

2 ) The moderately skilled guys, without anything great. AKA. Briggs and he was old. Don't pick the very old or very fat!

3 ) The unskilled goons.

You have one example of a smaller man beating a skilled big guy on points, just one and that is it in the past 30 years which is quite a case study! I think that is it. Yes-- I want your help finding the exceptions category two, and remember I am talking ( I'll lower the bar for you ) Smaller heavyweights 6'1" or under, 215 pounds or less and with equal to or less the a 76" reach.

Strike the matches when a guy was past their prime. I''ll give you credit as you can surely find more...not in tier one as it has been reached this is only one man, but in the uncharted field of category two, which will help my prove my overall theory. When the time is right, I'll put all of the above together in a new post.

I am eager to see what you come up with. I started the study in the 1990's. Giving you permission to go back to John L Sullivan. I suspect you'll find a few moderately skilled big guys now...Good luck.

You TOLD me Briggs wasn't ranked? Are you sure about that? I'll bet he was.

Listen, you do what you need to in order to feel the way you want. You obviously need to keep pushing the goal posts back. Have fun with that. It's pretty obvious this is a meaningless thread. But hey, you do you!!

[QueensburyRules]

If a prime Holyfield fought a prime Valuev, for heavyweight honors who do you honestly think would win Queen B? Honestly?

- - Holy would fight a better fight early, but get worn down and beat up.

Because of the Ks decimating the heavy division, King ever the opportunist seized on Valuev as a freak show promotion in Germany. We never got to see the best of Valuev, but his wins were solid and only ugly as opponents could do nothing but Run, ie Chagaev and Pinky Toe Hay, or hang on to him ie Ruiz and Field when Vlauev was no longer allowed to throw them across the ring like the sacks of they were, so the ref could break them for 12 stinking rounds.

[billeau2]

- - Holy would fight a better fight early, but get worn down and beat up.

Because of the Ks decimating the heavy division, King ever the opportunist seized on Valuev as a freak show promotion in Germany. We never got to see the best of Valuev, but his wins were solid and only ugly as opponents could do nothing but Run, ie Chagaev and Pinky Toe Hay, or hang on to him ie Ruiz and Field when Vlauev was no longer allowed to throw them across the ring like the sacks of they were, so the ref could break them for 12 stinking rounds.

Fair enough.