Would bigger legs have added to Tommy Hearns' power?

You're a f'n idiot....

 

you just have to look at their legs. like this is a fact

This content is protected

This content is protected

hopkins too now that i notice it

 

**** off child.... back to the kiddy pool where you belong.

 

deboonked and now you start talking about children.. okay

 

You didn't debunk anything troll.

YOU said power is all due to bone density. That's you're wannabe 'hot take' on power. If you honestly believe that's only where it comes from....you're more clueless then originally perceived.

 

I showed you that multiple hard hitters have tiny legs and you started saying no they dont and i showed you video of them boxing and their clearly tiny legs showing and you then said something about kids

 

You should fight at the lowest weight you feel comfortable with. It's that simple. If you're comfortable at 60kg but not at 58, why move down? The negatives of being drained far outweigh the positives in almost every case.

If you wanna hit harder you need to train the entire force-velocity curve in muscle groups responsible for generating, transmitting and delivering power. You also need to work on improving your form. Training punch specific exercises through the speed strength curve is also beneficial, as is changing resistance curves. Changing resistance curves will help build that snap.

 

I would guess that it's mostly technique, then ability to land hard without hurting your hand. Maybe legs play a factor but definitely not required as too many powerful punchers have chicken legs to say that having big power is a result of big legs.

 

You compete in a division limited by weight. So bigger legs means smaller upperbody or being a shorter fighter (in the same division).

You want ALWAYS your weight in your upper body. Big legs are a waste of weight. So no, Hearns was perfect as he was.

Regarding KO power, it is like chin. You either have it or not. If you dont have it... well... not much to do about it. You can try to improve it a little bit, but if you dont have it you dont have it and nothing can be done about it. There are people who can easily KO even punching with shitty technique, and there are people who will never KO anyone no matter how good his punching technique is, most of us are in the middle, a good technique will help you to KO. But to be a KO monster, you need to be born with that. Same for chin, as I said before.

 

Probably not. Unlike some fighters Hearns power was not drawn from his legs.

 

They would have reduced his power. With bigger legs Hearns would not have been able to fight at JMW/WW. His punches would have less effect on MWs and LHWs.

 

There is not a direct correlation between hypertrophy and increases in power nor strength.

 

A bigger cross-section of muscle is the thing most correlated with increased power & strength.
Muscle size is most of hypertrophy & what it usually refers to.
Although there is also "sacroplasmic" hypertrophy, increases in volume due to waters, sugars, capillaries...high volume worouts that are still demanding such as drop & compound sets deliver this.
Anatomical factors, technique, muscle fiber types & type of training play a part.
But the biggest single factor is muscle size.

Now that has limited association with throwing a punch, ball, or batting.
It may or may not help, depending upon several factors including where you start, end, flexibility etc.

 

Why does every boxing trainer in history say otherwise?