If Wlad was 3 or 4 inches shorter, he would be a crap boxer!!!

He would not fight this way if he were shorter. How it that hard to understand.

 

Wlads skills are truly top shelf. If you can't see that, you haven't fought at a high level. Period.

It is not easy to pump a jab hard and often, round after round, maintaining perfect distance. His ring generalship is superb. Manny Steward is on record saying a straighter, more perfect right hand may not have belonged to any heavyweight, ever.

He's patient, controlling, and his gameplan hasnt failed him in a long, long time. He's fought men his own size, and dominated them easily, ie Thompson.

Can't do it with average skills, mate. If all you needed were size and average skills, I'd be heavyweight champion.

 

PW gets criticized for liking to come inside and slug it out and not using his height, Wlad expertly uses his height and is criticized for being boring.


People think brawlers have no technique and criticize them for lacking skill and fundamentals. Wlad works off a beautiful jab, has great punch technique, and is as textbook and fundamentals-conscious as they come yet he is criticized for being dull.


What exactly are you guys loooking for anyway? Please explain to me.

 

If Mike Tyson had of been only 5ft I personally don't think he would of made it as the heavyweight champ. :roll:

Do you see how **** these threads are now?

 

Hate these stupid threads about changing the dimensions of a boxer. If Wlad was smaller, he would be even faster due to being lighter and having shorter levers. He would also learned to fight in a completely different manner than he does now.

Height and size does not automatically equate to success at heavyweight. Infact throughout heavyweight history men the size of Wlad have been less likely to succeed and there are plenty of fighters Wlad size in the current division who are not anywhere near as successful and effective as Wlad.

 

If he was smaller he'd fight a bit differently...he'd have to.
A 6 foot 6 Frazier would fight different than the 5-10 version.


6 foot 3 Wlad would throw more hooks off the jab, and some upper cuts,, and have a bit more upper body motion. He would still jab his way in, and still have fast hands in the classic one two.
He does have a classic long hook and would have that when shorter too.

He's have more sidestep out when he retreats, in he'd have to have that.
He'd be more fluid in retreat in he would not be so forward balanced, as he is now...where he can count on use his hight to get out of the way of punches.
He's 'stiff' in retreat in he is coming off a forward balance point using his jab so has to come back to balance before he can move.. He would use the shell more in that is more European.
He's also come in at 230.

 

Imagine if Tyson was 10 ft tall ....awesome.

 

Fella,half the ******s on here will still miss your point even after you schooling them with your top thread.

 

If you were three or four inches shorter you'd be a female.

 

Yeah but he's not though is he

 

Well, they had every right to call you names, since you just admitted you haven't really watched any of WK's fights yet you create a thread on the subject in which you baselessly accuse the guy of being "all size and no skill"

 

**** boxer? Not even. The force that he is? No. He would not.

 

He might even be better in many aspects than he is- he'd be quicker, more agile, still big enough to jab well, he'd still have KO power in both hands, and his conditioning would likely improve as well because it takes less energy to fight at 220-225 than it does at 240-245. He's also smart enough to adjust his style to what suits him best.

A 6'2-6'3 Wlad is still the best in the division.