6'0 209lb Chambers beating 6'7 253lb Dimitrenko proves bigger is not better

Bigger isn't always better. It has to be accompanied by a certain type of skill, and the fighter must know how to use his size. Then it can become a powerful asset.

Put Chambers in with one of the Klitschkos and I think size would matter quite a bit.

 

It certainly suggests that the smaller heavyweights would do better to come in trim and maximise their advantages in terms of speed rather than bulking up in a futile atempt to outmuscle the superheavyweights.

I have argued this before the Chambers Dimitrenko fight and didnt get much suport for the idea.

 

There have been fighters who bulked up considerably and did seem to match quite well physically with bigger men. Evander's probably the best example.

 

Size would matter but I think the Klitschko brothers are plain superior to Chambers in most areas. Chambers could be Tony Thompson's size and he still likely wouldn't beat Wladimir.

What this fight truly proved is that the small heavyweights are better off fighting at their optimal weight rather than put on extra weight to become "bigger" and "stronger".

 

Size is a tool like any thing else. You have to know how to use it. A boxer who is taller and has a longer reach will almost all ways win if he knows how to take advantage of his advantages.

 

This isn't really true. Size must be accompanied by other skills to be effective.

 

It is probably going to happen before too long.

 

Dimitrenko never beat anyone of note, but it was a very nice victory for Chambers and i was rooting for him. He'll go for Wlad since he's the WBO mandatory, but an aging Vitali Klitschko would be a much better (more winable) fight for him.


As for the thread title.

 

Chambers can be the man to upset an aging Vitali Klitschko, plus it would set up a MEGAFIGHT with brother Wlad for all the official marbles. I like how Chambers is old school in regularly fighting top opposition (Peter, Povetkin and Dimitrenko, all top10, within a little more than a year), but they would've been better off taking a route to a WBC or WBA title shot. Wlad would be suicide.

The left hook with which he floored Dimitrenko was a beauty and the big Ukranian never saw it coming. He has a very nice uppercut, too. A very complete boxer with a solid beard to boot.

 

Stanama is difently needed as a boxer with hight/reach advantages Should be on his toes. Jabing and moving keeping himself out of his opoents punching range while being able to hit his opoenent. Also displine to fight this way is very important as well. This is all part of knowing how to take advantage of a hight/reach advantage.

 

Agreed. Dimtirenko will never beat a top ten fighter. Dimtrenko proved to be too timid, and lacking of power...even vs ones on Chambers power level. I thought Dimtirenko toughed up a bit, but as this fights proves he did not.

The title of this thread is a joke. Chambers beating Dimtirenko means little. If Chambers can beat either Kiltschko, that would mean something.

 

I have to agree with you wholeheartedly on this one. It drives me crazy seeing a fighter willingly give up his strengths like that in a futile effort to improve an area that will never get to the level he'd need to win that kind of fight in the first place.

Hopefully the Chambers fight will send a message to guys like Arreola to get in the best shape possible, and show that fighters should pay attention to what their personal best weight is instead of shooting for a weight that undermines their best assets. They're slowing themselves down and doing half of the bigger fighter's work for them.

 

Soid post :thumbsup