6ft3, 210lbs, Cut like diamond with 82inch reach = small?

210lbs is a mere 9lbs lighter than Wilder who is huge?
82inch reach is bigger than Wlads and 1 inch less than Wilders?
6ft3 is Ali's height and taller than Ibeabuchi

 

Wilder is just tall, not "huge"
210 is what current Cruisers weight at fightnight, some even significantly more (like G. Jones).
82" at 6' 3" is a huge reach for that size, almost like Mayweather huge.

Question, who are we talking about here? Jennings? Cunningham? :blood

 

"USS" Cunningham, the man is by no means small. He may be undersized compared with Fury but who isn't.

Iron chinned fighterS from the past have been stunned or dropped by much lesser opponents than USS.

 

USS had a big problem.

His promoters didn't know how to pay off the judges.

And yes - long arms won't do it without power, and though he knocked Fury down, he just isn't really a heavy in body shape.

I do take your point though, that Wilders legs are crazy skinny for a heavy (which is why you see him 10lb lighter than Parker and 17lb lighter than Joshua, even though he's taller than both, and they're both young and putting on muscle)
Once he takes a couple of shots from REAL contenders, we'll see how those chicken legs hold up.

 

Who is this, Usyk?

 

Wilder's taller than Joshua? :huh

 

Usyk only has 78 inch reach, this is Steve Cunningham, also known as Povetkin's grand daddy

 

Oh.

Little factual, scientific information, that I hope doesn't get me banned:

Your average sized white man has a reach roughly equivalent to his height, for instance 6'0 = 72", so your average 6'0 white man has a 72" reach.

Your average sized black man has a reach %5 longer than his height, for instance, a 6'0 black man will usually have a reach of about 75-76".

Most boxers, (and basketball players) have a longer than normal reach, obviously. So both Usyk with a 6'6" reach and Cunningham with a 7'0 reach are outliers.

 

Well, it depends. If you're talking about an old time boxer, then he's "huge", "strong", would "manhalndle" today's heavyweights.

If, on the other hand, said fighter is of recent times, he's a manlet, a "cruiserweight", "too small".

All this, while at the same time the same people will try to pretend "size don't matter". But, does it matter, or not? You can't pretend someone not only wins, but dominates based on size, but at the same time size doesn't matter.

It's the Size Paradox, the elephant in the room in boxing nobody wants to talk about, where someone the size of Ali or Foreman, (who both were considered VERY big for their divisions and usually towered over their much smaller opponents), but with better athleticism and a more chiseled bodies (both Ali and Foreman were flabby, Ali only looked fit when he was fighting as light heavyweight (!!), cruiserweight, and the very beginning of his career, when he was skinny for today's standards) are considered "hopelessly small".

But size don't matter, a'ight?!?

 

USS is holed below decks.

 

Aaagh! Racism! We are all exactly the same Arrest this man

 

210 lbs is indeed a cruiserweight's fightnight weight. Cunningham has no business at heavy, never did. Not to mention he was always chinny and featherfisted even at cruiser.

 

Another difference that can be measured between Caucasian and Afro-Caribbean athletes is the higher prevalence of fast-twitch fibres in the muscles of the latter and largely explains why black sprinters are faster and black boxers (generally) have faster hands.

 

He has only 1 loss by ko and thats to the best fighter in the world today.

210 is the same weight as prime haye, byrd, Ali and Holyfield

Cunningham is atleast as tall as them with a longer reach

 

great win by the furious one.