AJ is all muscle and has never been beaten by muscle as a pro The Tuscaloser is all muscle and has never been beaten by muscle as a pro Fury is all fat and the closest he has come to losing is to this guy So of the three dominant HWs of our generation two of them have loses to fat (stoppage losses at that) and the other arguably lost to fat too This content is protected Even going back a generation to the previous dominant champions the Klitschko brothers the younger one Wlad's most resounding, and truth be told only legitimate defeat during his prime that wasn't due to gassing out, was to fat in Corrie Sanders. In fact, the only fighter to hurt his iron-chinned brother was Sanders too. Both of them still to this day say he was the hardest puncher they ever fought. The scientific data doesn't lie like the fat deniers do.
I'm Andy Ruiz and I approve of this message ! This content is protected The image shows in the preview or edit, but not when I post it. Not sure why?
You have to pay more tax to support them while they're still alive: most obese people have more health problems, meaning more costs on the public health service and they have a lower employment rate and earn less, so lower productivity and less tax revenue. In purely economic terms, the fit are forced to carry the unhealthily fat.
If you get stranded on a desert island the men with fat stores will survive longer. If you are in a cold environment the men with fat stores will cope better.
It's not hard to underestimate someone who looks like they've eaten every mars and snickers in California and anyone beaten by the blob will struggle to live that down, more so the poster boy for weightlifting and a clean diet, even if the blob in question is an ATG close range fighter.
Same if you're adrift at sea or catch a disease. Fat evolved for primal survival reasons but people disregard it because we live under artificially prosperous conditions where a high body fat % isn't advantageous, especially as it's considered an aesthetic liability. But a fight in an enclosed area is a primal survival scenario and in that situation, the enormous and athletic fat man is king.
You have to understand that the vast majority of these fat deniers are muscle and have had to work very hard to gain that muscle. Years of toiling away in the gym lifting weights to sculpt their physiques so the last thing they want hear is that it's all been a huge waste of time, energy and effort.
Ruiz's trainers are on record saying Ruiz is a better boxer fat than skinny. But that is certainly not true for all.
Indeed. Don't tell them that while they're making themselves miserable with strenuous dieting and toiling away lifting weights, they're wasting time, energy and incurring injuries that inhibit their ability to improve their boxing skills. And all so they can get beaten-up by fat men!
Yes. I think a sizable percentage of these fat deniers are low self-esteem fatties whose confidence has been bludgeoned out of them by the relentless propaganda from the media and the so called 'experts' about fat being inferior to muscle which of course is utter nonsense.
Ali looked a bit over his ideal weight there, not "look how fat he looked" heavy. Other times at that weight he looked leaner. In part it is how the photo is taken, other times there might be a little more muscle & less fat at the same weight. I do not think the measurements are accurate. At least Ali did not have a 17" calf, & Frazier more than 15". He was listed as 17" & 26" thighs elsewhere. Sometimes fat may be helpful at the highest levels. If as noted it works for their body type & I would add strategy & opponent. Some advantages you cite are dubious. You cannot count on an opponent underestimating someone larger, nor them feeling worse if they lost. If say they did, you could argue that would be a motivating factor. Also it is hard to argue for that *and* claim intimidation at the same time. Also reduced narcissism? That even when often true does not necessarily translate into being more likely to win. You really are reaching when you say something like "more sweaty & slippery". While obesity tends to make one sweat more, everyone working hard will sweat, that is a silly argument. A much lower absolute limit for muscle thank fat? Sure, even with steroids. But only so much fat is even valuable before it is too much, so that is not a factor. The same amount of muscle is more likely to make you gas than fat? I know it is metabolically different & yes more inert, you may be correct, but I would like to see some evidence for that claim. Take say...Frank Bruno when he fought Tyson at 6' 3" & a chiseled 247. If he had the muscle mass of most boxers around mid-century, he would weigh a max of 217, likely less! So with 30 or so less muscle & 30 or so more pounds of fat & coming in at 247, someone like him would have a better gas tank? Also that muscle helps move you around, so if anything fat might be more likely to slow you down a bit more. YES, the grappling & endurance matters, wearing down an opponent, may well apply in many cases. It was already broached, but do you favor heavier guys due to your own build & identifying with them?
