View Full Version : Tall Boxer or Short Boxers?


Rampage*
04-27-2005, 09:26 PM
I basically just want to know, what gives the greater advantage?

akins12732
04-27-2005, 09:29 PM
depends if a short is fighting a short or a tall fighting a tall

Rockin'
04-27-2005, 09:29 PM
Baggy boxers, the ladies like them much better than the tighty whities.............Rockin' :D

akins12732
04-27-2005, 09:30 PM
nice rockin

buff_mike10
04-27-2005, 09:55 PM
the tall guys got the reach advantag, the short guy get to use his legs to punch, and attacks the body better.

chaawuu
04-27-2005, 10:29 PM
short guys hit harder, can work the body easier, and can slip punches easier. if the short guy can't get inside tho he's screwed, the tall guy can just jab him all day.

jack_the_rippuh
04-27-2005, 10:57 PM
I would rather have a short quick, slick, elusive boxer over a tall rangy fighter any day.

phallus
04-27-2005, 11:31 PM
I would rather have a short quick, slick, elusive boxer over a tall rangy fighter any day.



jack dempsey loved fighting taller guys, he always said they were easier to hit

GasPed
04-28-2005, 01:44 PM
jack dempsey loved fighting taller guys, he always said they were easier to hit
While Jack Dempsey was a great fighter, I don't think he would've found Lennox Lewis easy to hit.

In any weight class but heavy, I think it's a toss up - pros and cons for tall vs short and lots of examples of both kinds of champions.

At heavyweight, while there are lots of examples of “short” champions, I get the feeling the bar is being raised. I don’t think we’ll see a 5’10” heavyweight champion ever again. There are just too many skilled guys at 6’2” and over, and since there are no weight restrictions, the 5’10” 220 guy is going to be giving up 10 – 40 pounds in every fight. Not impossible, just really unlikely he could overcome that.

leff
04-28-2005, 02:10 PM
While Jack Dempsey was a great fighter, I don't think he would've found Lennox Lewis easy to hit.

In any weight class but heavy, I think it's a toss up - pros and cons for tall vs short and lots of examples of both kinds of champions.

At heavyweight, while there are lots of examples of “short” champions, I get the feeling the bar is being raised. I don’t think we’ll see a 5’10” heavyweight champion ever again. There are just too many skilled guys at 6’2” and over, and since there are no weight restrictions, the 5’10” 220 guy is going to be giving up 10 – 40 pounds in every fight. Not impossible, just really unlikely he could overcome that.

Agree being shorter is good in all the weightclasses below hw, where the shorter is the stronger.

there is possible with another 5.10 heavy, we must just wait for another tyson.

tri4ben2
04-28-2005, 03:18 PM
At heavyweight, while there are lots of examples of “short” champions, I get the feeling the bar is being raised. I don’t think we’ll see a 5’10” heavyweight champion ever again. There are just too many skilled guys at 6’2” and over, and since there are no weight restrictions, the 5’10” 220 guy is going to be giving up 10 – 40 pounds in every fight. Not impossible, just really unlikely he could overcome that.

You say that we may never see another 5'10 heavyweight champion again, but there are plenty of people here that think that we may see a 5'10, 220 (or more) champion in three days.

Stickman
04-28-2005, 03:32 PM
Size is always an advantage in boxing. Whether the fighter uses it properly (or at all) is the only thing in question during a boxing match.

To paraphrase:

"A good little guy can't beat a good big guy" is, always has, and always will be 100% true in boxing. There are sports where size isn't important, or in fact where smaller guys have an advantage...boxing isn't among them.

TheBrownBomber22
04-28-2005, 03:35 PM
"A good little guy can't beat a good big guy" is, always has, and always will be 100% true in boxing. There are sports where size isn't important, or in fact where smaller guys have an advantage...boxing isn't among them.

I agree a good big fighter always beats a good little fighter.

jabsRstiff
04-28-2005, 03:40 PM
The "good big man beats a good little man"....is used when discussing fighters' weight, not height.

Being shorter or taller....one is not better than the other.


Sounds like a cliche, but it all truly depends on the fighter.