What's up with all the tiny little welters these days?

Ever since Manny and Floyd moved up, it seems like they've shrunk the division.

Hearns was 6'1, Leonard was 5'10, Oscar and Tito were 5'10 and 5'11, Plasterito was a similar size.

And tbh most of them weren't exactly built like Erik Morales were they? They were solidly enough built.

Now look at the more contemporary era.

Pacquiao - 5'5 or 5'6.

Floyd - 5'8.

Thurman - 5'7

Porter - 5'6.

Broner - 5'6

Garcia - 5'9

Khan - 5'8

Crawford - 5'8

Spence - 5'9

The average height is about 5'7.5. Tiny. And tbh these little guys aren't exactly built like tanks either. Even 5'7 Roberto Duran looked more built and solid at welter than the likes of Thurman, and that was with same day weighs.

Why are they so tiny these days? I thought the divisions would be getting bigger, trying to squeeze every advantage. Do you think people are realising that perhaps less weight cutting = better performance, and is a better advantage than a slight size advantage? If not, wtf, why are they so tiny?

 

We watch so much boxing that we lose perspective... welterweights arent "big" men in general, outside of a freak outlier like Hearns... who was legitimately an above average size man shrunken down to 147. Trinidad was also a large man shrunken down. Hearns and Tito were probably the two biggest welters of the last 40 years.

You might be looking a bit too much into it , but those stats are interesting.

I'll add a few - Benitez was like 5'9, 5'10.

Curry was 5'10.

Starling was 5'7 or 5'8.

Simon Brown about 5'9.

Quartey like 5'8.

Mosley 5'9

 

Napoles was 5'7, Starling was 5'8, maybe 5'9... Basilio was 5'6 1/2 ... Griffith 5'7 1/2... Rodriguez 5'8... etc

Honestly, welters 5'10 or bigger are not common... Welters over 6 feet are notable for being freakishly tall for the weight (Hearns, Breland, Williams)

 

Hearns was a BIG MAN... on top of being tall. You saw it when he moved up.

Breland and Williams were just tall. Neither had as large a frame as Tommy.

I saw Mark Breland in person less than a year ago. He's not a big dude. Just a tall one.

 

Starling wasnt tall, McDogg. I'd say 5'9 is a stretch. He was 5'8, tops.

Both Robinson and Kid Galivan were tall AND had solid frames - both 5'11.

 

I didn't say otherwise

 

Jesus Christ - you Flanagan's waste no time.

 

Whatever

 

Tyson and Tua were both only like 5'9 or so.

 

The midgets have been able to move up because there's been no proper WW waiting for them on the other side.

 

We can't really trust these stats. These are not official measurement, it's the boxer and his team that give his height. Some like to add a few inches others substract a few inches

 

Which is exactly why Hagler, Leonard, Duran & Hearns would go through each and every one of those little modern freaks like knives through butter...

 

Khan was always listed over here as 5-10", I saw him beside Froch, who is about 6', and Khan is not 5-10"

Haye is 6'3" which makes him 5" taller than Khan, right?

 

I do think promoters/managers have some influence over where fighters congregate.

 

Khan is 5’8 at the most.

 

Spence is a pretty big welterweight. He’s got some height and reach on him.

Agreed on the rest. But also as was mentioned, these aren’t big guys. Those others are probably about average height for a welterweight.

 

at a certain point you have to lose respect for a fighter if he's basically emaciated in day to day life just so he can stay in a weight class
a great should be able to hit the buffet between fights

 

They might, but not for this reason. That is load of rubbish

 

Nah, the POINT of it All is MAKING the Weight...

Whether You're "Naturally Bigger" or Not, You STILL Have to Make the Weight...As We May (or May NOT) Have Seen in the Rungvisai-Estrada RE, Making Weight MATTERS...The Potential is ALWAYS There for Being WEAK @ the Weight...

As BIG as Jarett Hurd or Jaime Munguia Are, They Still Have to MAKE '54...








REED