bill1234

LOL no, but its still a harder oppenent than 90% of todays heavies.

__________________
MEMBER OF BOXINGFORUM.COM HALL OF FAME-JANUARY, 2008

hhascup

Poet, if you look back at some of my earlier posts, I have said the same thing you just stated. Rocky would be a little bigger like you said. I know some of his family and they are a little bigger then Rocky, but if they were boxers, they still would be on the small side as far as heavyweights go.

He wouldn't be as big as some of the top Heavyweights in the last several years. He most likely would be about 6'0" and weigh a little over 200 pounds.

I stated this several times and some people on this site still claim that Rocky would beat these guys at the same height and weight that he had in the 1950's.

poet682006

I'm inclined to say Rocky would be more than a little larger. Also that Lennox would be more than a little smaller if things were reversed.

Poet

hhascup

Not so, the average height of a man has increased approx. 1-1/2" in the last 40 to 50 years. The average weight has increased approx. 25 pounds. I don't think it all muscle either. Most people today aren't in as good a shape as they use to be, this also includes boxers.

Here's an article I found several years ago:



Press Release
For Immediate Release
October 27, 2004 Contact: CDC National Center for
Health Statistics
Press Office, 301-458-4800
Americans Slightly Taller, Much Heavier than 40 Years Ago

Adult men and women are roughly an inch taller than they were in 1960, but are nearly 25 pounds heavier on average as well, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In addition, average BMI (body mass index, a weight-for-height formula used to measure obesity) has increased among adults from approximately 25 in 1960 to 28 in 2002.

The report, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States, prepared by CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, shows that the average height of a man aged 20-74 years increased from just over 5'8" in 1960 to 5'9½" in 2002, while the average height of a woman the same age increased from slightly over 5'3" 1960 to 5'4" in 2002.

Meanwhile, the average weight for men aged 20-74 years rose dramatically from 166.3 pounds in 1960 to 191 pounds in 2002, while the average weight for women the same age increased from 140.2 pounds in 1960 to 164.3 pounds in 2002.

Though the average weight for men aged 20-39 years increased by nearly 20 pounds over the last four decades, the increase was greater among older men:

* Men between the ages of 40 and 49 were nearly 27 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.
* Men between the ages of 50 and 59 were nearly 28 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.
* Men between the ages of 60 and 74 were almost 33 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.

For women, the near opposite trend occurred:

* Women aged 20-29 were nearly 29 pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.
* Women aged 40-49 were about 25½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.
* Women aged 60-74 were about 17½ pounds heavier on average in 2002 compared to 1960.

Meanwhile, the report documented that average weights for children are increasing as well:

* The average weight for a 10 year-old-boy in 1963 was 74.2 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 85 pounds.
* The average weight for a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was 77.4 pounds; by 2002 the average weight was nearly 88 pounds.
* A 15-year-old boy weighed 135.5 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight of a boy that age increased to 150.3 pounds.
* A 15-year-old girl weighed 124.2 pounds on average in 1966; by 2002 the average weight for a girl that age was 134.4 pounds.

According to the report, average heights for children increased as well over the past four decades. For example:

* The average height of a 10-year-old boy in 1963 was 55.2 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old boy had increased to 55.7 inches.
* The average height of a 10-year-old girl in 1963 was about 55.5 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 10-year-old girl had increased to 56.4 inches.
* In 1966, the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 67.5 inches or almost 5'7½"; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old boy was 68.4 or almost 5'8½".
* In 1996, the average height of a 15-year-old girl was 63.9 inches; by 2002 the average height of a 15-year-old girl had not changed significantly (63.8 inches).

Average BMI for children and teens has increased as well:

* In 1963, the average BMI for a 7-year-old boy was 15.9; in 2002 it was 17.0. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 15.8 to 16.6 over the same period.
* In 1966, the average BMI for a 16-year-old boy was 21.3; in 2002, it was 24.1. For girls the same age, the average BMI increased from 21.9 to 24.0 over the same period.

The BMI is a single number that evaluates an individual's weight status in relation to height. BMI is generally used as the first indicator in assessing body fat and has been the most common method of tracking weight problems and obesity among adults.

The data in the report was based on actual body measurements taken as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which CDC's National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) has conducted periodically since 1960. The NCHS report, Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index (BMI) 1960-2002: United States is available on-line at N C H S Home.

poet682006

I'd like to see a study focusing specifically on athletes and on boxers in particular. In any case it's not so much height that's at issue but weight: That's the point everyone brings up in relation to boxers of different eras. You certainly have 5'10" - 5'11" Heavyweights today.....that weigh 250 pounds (David Tua). I'm taking a rather crude look at Heavyweight size of the decades and I'll let you know my findings.

Poet

hhascup

Rocky worked out as hard as anyone, even if he was 6'0" he would only weigh about 200-205 pounds. This would make him not much more then a Cruiserweight. He would still be too small for some of the Big Heavyweights of today. His thing was conditioning. He won a lot of his bouts because he was in much better condition then his opponent, this is not a knock on him, it's a credit to who he was.

TommyGunn

the point is guys, rocky wasn't 6ft and lewis wasn't smaller so IMHO marciano would have lost to these bigger guys.

the point you just made henry is one ive been making for a long time to now, if rocky fought today he most probably be in the cruiserweight division, he'd be the greatest, most dominating cruiserweight in history though.

hhascup

I agree 100%, this is what I have been saying for years.

poet682006

Roll my freakin eyes. The two of you have entirely missed my point, mostly becuase you already have preconceived notions that you're jealously loyal to.

Poet

TommyGunn

poet you cant predict for one second that rocky would have been any bigger in the 90's than he was in the 50's so i dont know what YOUR talking about!