Why does size matter?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Mr.DagoWop, Aug 25, 2016.


  1. Paulie walnutz

    Paulie walnutz Active Member Full Member

    506
    8
    May 23, 2015
    Point is that Dempsey like Tyson had one of the atg chins irregardless of his technique.
     
  2. mostobviousalt

    mostobviousalt Active Member banned Full Member

    519
    103
    Jun 4, 2016
    It's regardless.
     
    Absolutely! and Seamus like this.
  3. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    So you are saying that a fighter who fights like Marciano but is smaller would be in trouble. Don't you see the stupidity of this question? You are making it out that I am trying to say a smaller fighter always wins. This is incorrect and is a **** poor way for you to try and argue.

    We only saw Rocky Marciano at around 185 lbs. We don't know the effect that more or less weight would have. You are making assumptions about what weight would do for him. Would Mike Tyson have been better at 230 lbs rather than 220 lbs?
     
  4. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    So what does that have to do with this thread?
     
  5. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    Direct and misguided are two different things. By being direct I am directly talking to you and addressing what you are saying. It doesn't get more direct than that.

    You asked a stupid hypothetical question that did nothing but waste our time.
     
  6. Nighttrain

    Nighttrain 'BOUT IT 'BOUT IT Full Member

    5,292
    975
    Nov 7, 2011

    No, I'm just trying to figure out the logic of your "direct" response. Keep in mind that this thread is titled "Why does size matter?"

    I posed the question "how would a larger version of Rocky Marciano do against the classical version?"

    Your response was classical Marciano easily! You reasoned that the smaller classical version of Marciano would have the advantage of being able to come in lower and would have more endurance than the larger version indicated that I must not know very much about Marciano by virtue of the fact that I asked the question. I think I do know a little bit about Marciano and consider myself an, however, this is beside the point.



    Using your logic, I followed by asking if a smaller version of Rocky, who would be able to come in lower and would be quicker, with more endurance be able to defeat the larger classical Marciano. Again, you become defensive saying that I was attempting to put words in your mouth. This is not the case. I posed the question generally. You're the one that responded that the answers were obvious. Now you seem to be saying that the answer is not so obvious what would happen if Marciano was larger.
     
  7. Nighttrain

    Nighttrain 'BOUT IT 'BOUT IT Full Member

    5,292
    975
    Nov 7, 2011

    Except that you can't quite grasp apparently that I was merely asking the question. You are impressively thick.

    It would appear that the point of the thread is why is size important?

    To illustrate why size is important would be to remove the other variables. Do you follow? In other words, if all other things being equal.
     
  8. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    So because I said a 185 lb version of Marciano beats a 210 lb 6'1" version that all of a suddenly means a 173 lb version of Marciano beats the classic 185 lb Marciano? Why does that have to be so? Could Marciano not have been the best version of himself at the weight he came in at? I'm sure if Marciano could have come in smaller he would have. Again, this is where you are making false inferences up about my side of the argument.
     
  9. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    Well I'm not arguing that size wouldn't be important in that case. When did I say it wouldn't if all things were equal?

    Well this is boxing and two fighters are NEVER equal, when you follow boxing long enough that becomes apparant. I prefer to talk realistically when comparing two fighters, not setting them equal and then comparing the size difference. That is utterly moronic. We may be in the classic section and talking about fantasy fights but we can still use common sense and not change the fighters themselves. Unless comparing something like how much they would weigh in a certain era.
     
  10. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,626
    Mar 17, 2010
    I understand that this answer doesn't get to the "spirit" of your question, but classic Marciano should win.

    I say he should win, because Marcianos style fits his size. Now, if the bigger Marciano had time to refine his style, that's a different story.
     
    Boxingfan712 likes this.
  11. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,563
    Jan 30, 2014
    So then it sounds like agree that size matters. Maybe you can answer your own question then...
     
    Nighttrain likes this.
  12. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,626
    Mar 17, 2010
    Bigger guys inherently are stronger.

    I got some super heavies at my gym, and I personally think I can punch harder than most of them. I could be wrong, but I've yet to hear them produce the sounds and impacts on the bags that I've been able to with my power shots. However, it's still too early to say.

    But they can do things to the bags with little effort, that require more effort from me. For instance, they can throw a jab with out leaning in, and to match the power, I would have to lean in with the jab.

    I'm a hard puncher, but I have to work harder on my punching technique than the supers, to match their power. These guys can slap around the bag with lazy technique, and move them around easier than the smaller guys, relative to the kinds of punches they throw.

    I have this feeling that I'm gonna spar these guys eventually, so I've kinda been preparing for that mentally. It's forced me to get really honest with myself about the dangers and opportunities in fighting these guys. The first thing it made me notice, is that all the supers have really big heads! Which at first looks really intimidating. But then you realize that heads (hopefully) can't attack you, and that they are just big targets!

    I know if I land my hard shots, anyone will go down, superHW or not. So I'm hopeful that I can get under a jab and land an overhand, or an uppercut to the body. But if I tried to just move around and box these guys, I feel like I'd be ****ed. At the same time, these guys are way ahead of me in their boxing careers and experience.

    One downside I see first hand, is that it seems like their weight makes them have to use more energy than other weights to do the same thing. It's as if their bodies require additional "gears" to get things in motion. You can notice the strain. These guys can be slick, but they don't glide around the ring. They don't look smooth.

    I feel like with more experience, I can learn more about the pros and cons of the supers. I'm also kind of writing this as a stream of consciousness kind of post, just replying my thoughts.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2016
  13. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    All things being equal yes. That hardly answers the question. That is the easy answer. It is useless, things are never equal so that is a completely unrealistic response and is unacceptable.
     
  14. Nighttrain

    Nighttrain 'BOUT IT 'BOUT IT Full Member

    5,292
    975
    Nov 7, 2011
    Rez I just appreciate the fact that you understand that it was a question! Not everyone can grasp that subtly!

    I would throw in that being the optimal size could also hinge on the relative size of one's opponent. Perhaps Marciano was the right size for that time.
     
    reznick likes this.
  15. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,563
    Jan 30, 2014
    No-- the problem is that the question you led with "why does size matter" isn't really the one you meant to ask. You admit that size matters. Your real question is why some people here think that size advantages can help "lesser" fighters beat "greater" but significantly smaller fighters.

    As I've always complained, some guys here put "ATGs" on a pedestal to the point that they sound like they're discussing a race of immortals/comic book superheroes who can't ever be beaten by "regular" heavyweight champions and contenders, even if they have significant size advantages.
     
    Absolutely! and Nighttrain like this.