One of the Chin theories has been gaining popularity on ESB. Endorsed by Zak.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaMn92gRwgs[/ame]

Terrible quality, but the punches are clear if you focus.

However, I essentially agree with your argument. When Roy lost the reflexes to respond to punches, it drastically lowered his punch resistance ability. Not necessarily because his body was significantly weaker than other fighters, but also because his body simply wasn't used to absorbing hard punches. Although, the drop off between the two Tarver fights is drastic. If he was completely unable to take ANY punches, he'd have been stopped in their first fight.

I've got to think that another part of "punch resistance" simply has to do with becoming inured to being hit. This never happened to Roy because in his prime, he was virtually unhittable. Emphasis on virtually.

 

What about Ray Mercer?? He had an iron chin in his prime, but when he reached his 40s, he started to get knocked out.

My point is simply that there is some evidence for asserting that punch resistance declines with age. Not that it is an absolute truism that will occur in all cases, but that it does occur in many, and is therefore a potential explanation for why guys who had no problems with punch resistance at younger ages seemingly suddenly start to get knocked out.

 

Against Lewis, Williams and Mcbride - Tyson was coherent but dispirited. Meaning he could have taken more punishment but his energy levels were such that he would have the offensive output needed to give him a reason to stay upright. He was simply exhausted.

Tyson punch resistance has always been top notch. Top 5 amongst all HW Champions.

But punch resistance can wither over time and is sometimes psychological. Case in point, Roy Jones IMO had a pretty decent chin up until Ruiz. After Ruiz his loss in muscle added with his age and lack of intensity training added to the fact his body could not handle that kind of punishment anymore. Don't believe me: see Chris Byrd.

This guy took major shots from Wlad Klitschko, Vitaly Klitshcko, McCline (not a big puncher but still has decent HW Power) and Tua. Then he drops down to 175 and Shaun George (a non LHW puncher) has him wobbling all over the place.

 

Don't know..can we get Stephen Hawking's opinion on the matter?

 

Hawking recently discovered a miniature black hole in Chris Arreola's gut.

 

Hearns chin seemed to improve a little, but he got better defensively and took less chances later. Most guys chins do get worse, or they are easier to hit clean because thier reflexes slow.

 

atsch

Of course. III was so forgettable, I forgot it for a second.

When you look at them, really, the shot Glen caught him with and the one Green did aren't all that different. Overhand rights to left side of his head. It's a very fair point.

I guess what I'm not quite following in your posts is the distinction you are making between "physiological decline" and "getting slower". Are you saying one is genetic and the other is actual ring wear and tear? Either way, it seems like the effect is the same. We're not imagining what we are seeing when we identify a fighter as shot. It's shorthand for severe physical decline, and the effects are varied, but the effects are real.

 

Where's Rico? I thought he was the leading chin theorist of our generation.

 

This is my point. I don't get how people would argue that the physiological deterioration that accompanies age isn't an important factor in explaining the observed decline in punch resistance among many fighters.

 

I was the original Chinchecker on this site. However, Rico really took what I started to a new level, and I salute him for it.

I would also like to see what Rico has to say about this, as well as some of my other colleagues among ESB's Chincheckers!

 

Yes, but let's be clear - I am not arguing that physical ability to absorb a punch is the ONLY factor, merely that it is an important one. I certainly recognize the importance of physical decline in other areas (reflexes, speed, etc.), as well as accumulated punishment over the course of a career (i.e. "ringwear") as contributing factors.

Anyone who studies anything from a scientific viewpoint is aware that virtually any phenomenon is multi-causal. The question is the relative importance of the various potential causal factors - something that we are unlikely to be able to determine short of a longitudinal study examining these various potential causal explanations, which I think is unlikely to be conducted any time soon.

And even THEN, the debate would continue, trust me!!