Having a good chin is over rated! It aint even funny.

Wlad and Lewis.

Enough said.

Ever considered that it might not be all that? If you can go 12 with the likes of Tua and Mercer, having a Great Chin almost seems a waste.

 

atsch

When you can only degrade a fighter for having a **** chin when he dominates, it is ******ed.

"Oh, lewis dominated that fight easily, but he has a **** chin. If he got knocked out he would have lost!"

That is a typical ESB post.

 

I did that deliberately to point out that other things are more important than chin.

Some people act like it is always the be all and end all.

Even when a guy dominates.

It is only the be all and end all when... it ends you. Not when it actually does not.

 

I expect many people to mock this and deliberately misunderstand.

Those who don't will get my point.


Just look at Zak. He is the worst but many have the same mentality.

 

Not that this is the only problem. The way fighters are degraded is actually unique to the sport.

You don't here NFL teams talking about their "prime team" (as a pseudo-excuse), for example.

 

Woah. Time out.

What?

How tall do you have to be? Where is the cut off point?

Lots of fighters are very tall.

I think this is another thread.

 

All fighters have innate advantages. Being fast, powerful, tall, strong etc ect.

It sounded like you were saying "Well, Lewis just over came that because he was tall... so it is a bit iffy. Not sure it counts".

You can say "the only reason Tyson won so many fights was because he was fast and powerful. He overcame his tendency to get battered senseless only because of his innate advantages. Not just his wok".

If you use height as an example, how tall are you taking? 6'2. 6'4. 6'7.5. What if a fighter is very good at using his height. Is it only 6.2.56666? What if he is really tall but only uses his height a bit. Does he need to be 6'8 before that counts as height overcoming a bad chin?.

And so on.

 

Uh.

I did not say that it did not count.

But I think you know that.