I know y'all are probably fed up with the Fury glove threads by now, but I have been thinking about this for a bit. In the first Wilder fight the handwrap on Fury's left hand is noticeably more visible than the handwrap on his right. Is it possible that fury may have not fully inserted his left hand into his glove to get a bit more reach on his jab or am I a completely insane Wilder fanboy?
that would create a soft padded spot at the end of the glove which would absorb the impact making any jab less useful, if I am understanding what you are saying that is. so I would say no.
The jab would certainly have little to no power, but it would still be able to be used for point scoring
plausibly possible apart from the fact anyone with half a braincell can see Fury extends his fingers in his glove throughout the fight. https://www.reviewjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/13406499_web1_Wilder-Fury-Boxing-15-1-2.jpg If you really think Fury had his fist in the wrist of his glove you probably belong in a special facility for special people.
If you pull your fist out of your gloves it decreases how far you can extend the glove with your fingers. Fury obviously jabs with an open hand to extend the reach. I don't think pull his fist out of the glove is going to help him in that regard.
I'm not saying that fury cheated in their second bout, im asking if there is a chance that he may have tried to get a bit more of a reach advantage in their first fight
Sweet jumping Jesus on a bicycle of gold, THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL THEORY THAT HAS BEEN ALTERED 5-6 TIMES SUBSEQUENTLY. It went from the ol' wibble-wobble, to he removed padding, to he poisoned Wilder, to he added weights. Why he would not fully insert the hand if he were to add weights is idiotic, even by Wild-**** standards. Wilder lost. That is all.
I think the loaded gloves, removed padding and drugging theory's are wrong, I'm just saying there may be some validity to the theory about him not fully inserting his hand into his glove.
Think about what you are saying for a second critically. If ALL of these sometime contradictory theories are out there, then it is probably a very good indication that NONE of them are true, and were all cooked so that Wilder and his fans could deal with their cognitive dissonance over the fact that, at the end of the day, he just isn't that good.
Again, I'm just saying that I think there may be some validity to one of the theories, the first theory (or atleast the first theory that I came across) that Wilder fanboys brought up after his loss.