Tweet
this has been pointed out by several boxing scribes.
there skills are unremarkable. its all about size advantage nothing else.
there skills are unremarkable. its all about size advantage nothing else.
-
-
It's not just the size, they got skills too. But I agree if they were smaller they would be less dominant and therefore more exciting. -
That'd make them completely different fighters with different styles. That's like saying "What if Tyson was featherfisted".Comment
-
Skill is the ability to use one's natural talent's effectively. Their natural talent/gift is their size and their skillset is based around that. That's like saying if Floyd was slow as molasses, he'd be average.Comment
-
Yeah, and if your grandmother had balls she'd be your grandfather.Comment
-
Using your height and reach to your advantage is nowhere near as easy as you make it seem to be.Comment
-
Mayweather fights people close to his size if he had to fight people 30lbs heavier and 4/5 inch taller most would say it's unfair.Comment
-
Originally posted by Superflo777 View Postdon't agree with you guys. but i might be misunderstood because of my semantics. you see i don't think the K bro's are that skilled of boxers.Originally posted by madsweeney View Post
superflo i see tyson with his style and heart and skills beating his way to the top whether at 147 or 168 what ever.
with the klitschkos there skill set is unremarkable its all about size.Comment
-
What if Ali was slow? Foreman had no power? Tyson had no heart......oh wait scratch that one.Comment
-
We don't have power, speed and heart divisions. You know why? Because size/weight is a bigger advantage than anything else.Originally posted by pacmanis1 View PostComment
Comment