> > That's steroids and other ***.
> I do not buy that at all. I think guys like Holyfield pay top notch for a
nutritionist for a reason. I think a
> chemist of the body knows what formulas to pump the body using nothing but
natural foods and natural
> vitamins/minerals. There truly is no need for Steriods these days. Top
Nutristionists of Today know more than
> ever...they can get the body to do what they need without ever using
> i cheehuahua
> Doghouse Boxing. Updated 24/7 Boxing News & Boxing Humor.
Then if it's simply a matter of nutritionist, Joe Louis today would have
one, too, and it would then come down only to the skill and heart of the
fighter. And then the cross-era comparrisons are absolutely valid.
This "bigger people through evolution" is a modern myth. People are not
bigger today than 50 or 100 years ago. In fact, they may not be bigger than
even 1000 years ago. The population is greater, meaning you can have more
people of non-average size. For example, if you have 1000 people and 5 of
them are 6'5", then you later have 2000 and 10 of them are 6'5", it doesn't
mean people got bigger. It just means there were more chances to find
someone 6'5" tall.
Here's some facts on just how many people are normally the size of these
Out of 1000 males, how many are over 6'?
6'1" 90 out of 1000 72
6'2" 39 30
6'3" 15 11
6' 4" 7 5
6'5" 2 1
6'6" 1 1
So, Lennox Lewis and the Klitschkos represent only 1 out of 1000 men.
The averages for men are:
USA-5'9" 1/8 Europe-5'8" ?
Now let's stroll back through history and check out the midgets.
American Civil War (1861-65) is the best source for the heights of males of
the 19th century because of the military records. Most of the records are
from the Union side, since they kept more detailed records.
The average height for an American Civil War solder: 5'8 1/4" tall.
That's only 7/8 of an inch shorter than today.Factor in that many of the men
serving in the Union army were Europeons who just arrived in the United
States, and that modern statistics show Europeon men to be 3/8 inches
shorter and you end up with about 1/2" difference between men in 1861 and
men in 2002.
Examination of a recently recovered 16th-century warship showed an average
height of 5'8" inches among the drowned sailors. Now, these were Europeons,
and still only 3/4" shorter 500 years ago. And they were sailors, who's diet
had to be less nutritious than someone living on land with access to fresh
vegatables and fruits.
Most of the idea that people were much smaller is simply misinterpretation
of data. We look at the lower ceiling in 19th houses, lower doorways, and
assume people were shorter. But, a lower ceiling and door means less area to
heat in winter. Our average ceilings now are 8', their's were 7-71/2' but it
doesn't mean they were shorter. I once lived in a mill house that had 9'
ceilings. And it was built in the 1920's. Doesn't mean people were a foot
taller in the 1920s because of the 1 foot taller ceiling.
The truth is, all studies I've been able to find on human heights show
almost no change over the past 500 years. And height and weight go hand in
hand. The frame on a 6'5" man will, on average, be the same no matter which
century he was born into.
And, if human males are within 3/4" in height over a period of 500 years,
then why are we seeing such huge athletes in the past 40 years? What outside
factor has to be at work?
Better nutrition won't answer, because if that was the case, everyone would
be taller on average, and we're not. Only the atheletes are so much bigger
out of all proportion to the rest of the human race. Why?
Steroids. Body enhancing chemicals. Someone like Holyfield might do it with
nutrition and exercise, but he's not out of line with fighters of the past.
But what about all the others? Wrestlers cheat, but boxers play fair is