Anthony Joshua Reveals How A Fight With Mike Tyson Would Go

if you're going to make any claims on a public thread, the default purpose (unless specified) would be because you want others to accept your claims. So again, I ask why are you making claims then if not for others in this public thread (not just me) to accept your claims? Disagreeing doesn't make on a troll. Making claims for the sake of it without any good reason (which appears to be the category you fall under) qualifies one as a troll. Research about 'MOMENTUM' (If you already don't know what it is) to know why and how weight affects punch resistance and power. That's an 'ANECDOTAL' evidence / fallacy. Thus, they can be disregarded and deemed irrelevant. Weight divisions were created due to HIGH QUANTITY of mismatches in boxing. Which is evident by how often a boxer having a weight advantage wins compared to the boxer that is lighter. In other words, the heavier boxer wins more frequently than the lighter boxer (that doesn't mean the lighter boxer can't win at all, but that they have a lower chance of winning). This goes hand in hand with knockouts as well. Its a public thread and I'm stating my opinion on it. An opinion gathered by fighting sparring training and being around the game. It's my point of view. And that's a good enough reason to share it. I didnt ask you to accept it. Me talking from experience doesn't make me a troll. I'll research momentum, if while I'm doing that you look up, quality of opposition and how two guys with similar records can be operating at different levels. How you can't compare chins as in Valuev Holyfield on paper at all. Because of different opponents, times circumstances ect. It may be Anecdotal, but according to Juggernaut, it happened, it's reality, and even just one small guys hitting harder than all these big guys and just one fist landing harder than a shin seems to call into question your whole theory. None of it means add weight get more power, add weight get better resistance. Your idea is if you don't accept my opinion i shouldn't give it. Too bad.If you think I'm a troll, then you must he a bit of a fool to waste time on me.

You've accepted yourself as a potential troll by the following statement: If you don't care about others accepting your claims in a PUBLIC thread, then why are you posting those claims (the only other possible or most likely reason would be because you are trolling). I gotta admit though, I still get a chuckle out of the Julius Long thing. I didn't say people can't be knocked out when they are tall, only it's harder to reach them. Valuev was a decent boxer, Long wasn't. David Hayes a good puncher, but how can we know he was a better puncher than Bowe,Moorer or Alex's Stewart? Since they didn't fight the same guys? Maybe everyone who took Bowe or Moorer the distance does the same with Haye. There's no accurate way of comparing these punches therfore there's no accurate way to compare chin. Tell me, if on paper I have 20 fights and never go down but my opponents aren't that great and I'm not getting hit alot, do I have a better chin than a guy who's been down twice buts fought alot of good punchers with a crap defence? How can you know via the numbers?

I only read what you quote and believe me i think i have you beat with ALL the posts he posted to me in total. Go ahead go read comment 221 pg 23 and see how confused he actually is lol He was coming around and even finally admiited size was an advantage but than became wacky pete again when the convo went into the MMA directions which i actually know more abourt bc i dont just box . Hes getting mugged left and right . :sigh1: I agree! I've read those comments and even earlier ones and have seen the gradual changes in the conclusions of that user. It goes from something like: 'Mike Tyson has no problems against taller opponents to something bizarre like: And with size tends to come weight. WTF! Lol. Now, it appears the user is trying to argue that weight and size are DIFFERENT concepts. Lol

I didn't realise I was here to be accepted by you or anyone else. People disagree on here all the time and express differences of opinions all the time. Are they all trolling? Is it only those who disagree with you who are trolling. That's abit Narcissistic. I didn't realise I was here to be accepted by you or anyone else. if you're going to make any claims on a public thread, the default purpose (unless specified) would be because you want others to accept your claims. So again, I ask why are you making claims then if not for others in this public thread (not just me) to accept your claims? People disagree on here all the time and express differences of opinions all the time. Are they all trolling? Disagreeing doesn't make on a troll. Making claims for the sake of it without any good reason (which appears to be the category you fall under) qualifies one as a troll. Hopefully you are wrong about science suggesting that weight improves punch resistance Research about 'MOMENTUM' (If you already don't know what it is) to know why and how weight affects punch resistance and power. because in Juggernaut, we have a supermiddle who hits harder than Deontay Wilder, and has a harder punch than a Muay Thai kick. That's an 'ANECDOTAL' evidence / fallacy. Thus, they can be disregarded and deemed irrelevant. The more divisions the more titles the more money. Remember, those werent always the magic numbers. Some say boxing was better before so many weight classes. Go figure. Weight divisions were created due to HIGH QUANTITY of mismatches in boxing. Which is evident by how often a boxer having a weight advantage wins compared to the boxer that is lighter. In other words, the heavier boxer wins more frequently than the lighter boxer (that doesn't mean the lighter boxer can't win at all, but that they have a lower chance of winning). This goes hand in hand with knockouts as well.

I only read what you quote and believe me i think i have you beat with ALL the posts he posted to me in total. Go ahead go read comment 221 pg 23 and see how confused he actually is lol He was coming around and even finally admiited size was an advantage but than became wacky pete again when the convo went into the MMA directions which i actually know more abourt bc i dont just box . Hes getting mugged left and right . :sigh1: I don't just box either. I'm at an MMA gym and I've said so all along. You punch harder than Muay Thai guys kick, you can't get more wacky than that. As for mugging, I come from Peckham, I know what mugging means. I'm just having a chat with two people who love to talk to me, that's all. 😊

You've accepted yourself as a potential troll by the following statement: If you don't care about others accepting your claims in a PUBLIC thread, then why are you posting those claims (the only other possible or most likely reason would be because you are trolling). I didn't realise I was here to be accepted by you or anyone else. People disagree on here all the time and express differences of opinions all the time. Are they all trolling? Is it only those who disagree with you who are trolling. That's abit Narcissistic.

1) Well what is the 'main factor' for having weight divisions in the first place then if not for it being the main factor for the likelihood of knocking out an opponent and not being knocked out in return for the heavier boxer? In addition, why are there multiple examples of multiple boxers having a CAREER lower KO percentage against heavier opponents than against lighter opponents? 2) What's that supposed to mean? 3) If we REMOVE the word 'power' with the word 'KNOCKOUT CAPABILITIES', then my argument still stands, which is that the likelihood of a boxer knocking out heavier opposition will be lower than against lighter opposition. Whether it's 'power', or whether it's mystical 'OTHER FACTORS', my argument still stands, Which is that heavier boxers NORMALLY will have the better punch resistance and KNOCKOUT CAPABILITIES (replacing the word 'power') than lighter boxers. 4) Like with the word 'power', if we replace the word 'chin' with the word 'KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE', then my argument still stands, which is that heavier boxers will NORMALLY be less likely to get knocked out than lighter boxers. At this point, it appears you're just playing around with semantics. 5) Julius Long getting knocked out proves that being TALL doesn't make you as resistant to getting knocked out as you have been claiming all along (making excuses for why Valuev has never been knocked out). Julius Long is naturally lighter than Nikolai Valuev but practically the exact same height. 6) My reason for comparing Holyfield to Valuev was to demonstrate that the best heaviest boxers with the greatest PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN have even better PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN than the best lightest boxers with the best PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN and my point is evidently true. 7) David Haye has a better knockout record at modern heavyweight than anybody Evander Holyfield fought, except Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis. With the exception of Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis and perhaps George Foreman, the caliber of opposition both Holyfield and Valuev fought on average are comparable at heavyweight. 8) Criticizing my knowledge and profession is irrelevant. You're yet to actually offer a logically sound & valid rebuttal argument. Are there others who know more about boxing than me? ABSOLUTELY! However, does their claims automatically become true just because they claimed something without those claims being substantiated? ABSOLUTELY NOT! 9) Do you even know what an Ad Hominem (personal attack) is? Read this to learn about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem I didn't claim you physically attacked me. You were verbally attacking my character / personality, which is a logical fallacy. Seriously, you're seriously exposing basic lack of knowledge in logic that anybody with average intelligence should be aware of, including pre-teens. Perhaps stay out of boxing for awhile and take some logic courses? That might be more important for your life. 10) You've given your 'theory' but they aren't substantiated. Thus, no objective individual has any reason to accept them. My arguments have been substantiated by evidence, statistics and logically laid out data. 11) When two boxers are the same weight, other factors come into play and that's when those other factors are significant. However, when two boxers weigh different, weight is more significant and those other factors become less significant. Hence, the purpose of having weight divisions. 1) Then why are you making claims then in a public thread? It's not just me not accepting your unsubstantiated claims but any objective individual. Either you're making claims because you want others to accept your claims. Or, you're just doing it for the sake of it (in which case you've just exposed yourself indirectly as a troll). 2) The evidence (statistics) do suggest that weight improves punch resistance. Science also does. There's a thing called 'MOMENTUM'. If you knew what it was, you would know how it affects punch resistance and power. If you didn't, then perhaps research upon it. 3) , A typical reproach against my analyses is to shout "Stats! Stats! Stats! Your stats don't tell the whole story". Well, fortunately for me "Stats! Stats! Stats!" are "Facts! Facts! Facts!" thus anyone complaining about statistics is complaining about reality ("Arithmetic is not an opinion"). It's true, that a statistic like "1 KO in 1 fight = 100% KO'ratio" is ridiculous but a record of 30, 40, 50 and more fights _IS_ representative. You _CAN_ deduct things from it. You _CAN_ interpret it correctly. 4) Me making the statement (paraphrasing) 'Mike Tyson will be a minor irritant' was something called 'OVER EXAGGERATION'. Ever heard of that word before? Even if it was an error, if I've already accepted the error and am ready to move on, then why should there be any need for you to bring it up again? One mistake has no bearing on my other arguments (which aren't directly connected). 4) Sparring and REAL bouts are SIGNIFICANTLY different. As in, I don't need to see sparring to know acknowledge why heavyweights (200 pounders) aren't allowed to fight opponents weighing below 200 pounds. Sparring sessions have no bearing on why the heavyweight division exists and why 200 pounders at heavyweight aren't allowed to fight sub - heavyweights. 200 might not be a 'magic' number, but it is a very IMPORTANT and SIGNIFICANT number, just like numbers 175, 168, 160, 154 and 147 are. Hence, the rule makers decided to divide boxers by those weight values / numbers. Seeing size advantage and thinking it means the more weight the bigger the advantages. This is where your coming from. I get it. Im giving my opinion. If you think I'm a Troll you are a fool for talking to me. Everyone who writes on this site is giving theres.It doesn't tally with yours or how you interpret the numbers. So what? It seems to bother you that I don't agree with you. Get used to it. Hopefully you are wrong about science suggesting that weight improves punch resistance, because in Juggernaut, we have a supermiddle who hits harder than Deontay Wilder, and has a harder punch than a Muay Thai kick. How can those smaller men withstand it. He's going to kill someone. The more divisions the more titles the more money. Remember, those werent always the magic numbers. Some say boxing was better before so many weight classes. Go figure.

I'm a Troll for having an opinion. Your buddy just claimed at 170 he hits harder than Wilder, and punches harder than Jimi Manuwa kicks. What do you think of that at the National office of statistics? Hahaha You've accepted yourself as a potential troll by the following statement: I don't care what you accept. If you don't care about others accepting your claims in a PUBLIC thread, then why are you posting those claims (the only other possible or most likely reason would be because you are trolling).

This user has practically self - admitted and self - exposed themselves as a troll (even if indirectly). Read through my previous response to learn why. It continues to get more and more hilarious. I'm a Troll for having an opinion. Your buddy just claimed at 170 he hits harder than Wilder, and punches harder than Jimi Manuwa kicks. What do you think of that at the National office of statistics? Hahaha

WORLD class means you have a title to show for your art or top status ranked . MMA is not an art its a sport which consists of different arts in one . So again NO Minuwa is not world class at anything particular . You can say what i cant and cant do ,its again irrelevant to me. Anyone who looks up guys who are actually PROVEN MT guys for decades that i have trained with would know whsts what ,go ahead whisper PHIL NURSE at your gym and we'll see whats what . Have you ever held a UFC 1 contract ? I have bc imy guy was good enough to represent his art in that set up back then out of everyone including Dennis Alexio so you can talk all the b.s you want . As far as deluded ? lol .....No that started with your first post . I think were done here .......lol ! I never said anything about Phil Nurse that was negative. You were the one who claimed that nobody at this gym could hit like the guys at yours. Now you know that the people who own this gym train world champions at Muay Thai, and the coach is a former world champion, which even Phil, who is also from the UK cannot claim. I didnt sad Manuwa was world champion, he's a top five fighter and therefore world class. And as the top Muay Thai guys in the country are here, they attest to the fact that Jimi kicks as hard as many world champions. That is, harder than you punch. Harder than anyone punches. UFC 1? Wtf has that got to do with you punching harder than Jimi kicks. He's in the UFC right now! Go watch Idris Elba fighter, see the guy training him, that's Kieran Keddle. Former world champion, who's trained 12 World champions, many of them here. Now tell me you punch harder than these guys kick. And after, let me know what it is you smoke. You get your moneys worth.

WORLD class means you have a title to show for your art or top status ranked . MMA is not an art its a sport which consists of different arts in one . So again NO Minuwa is not world class at anything particular . You can say what i cant and cant do ,its again irrelevant to me. Anyone who looks up guys who are actually PROVEN MT guys for decades that i have trained with would know whsts what ,go ahead whisper PHIL NURSE at your gym and we'll see whats what . Have you ever held a UFC 1 contract ? I have bc imy guy was good enough to represent his art in that set up back then out of everyone including Dennis Alexio so you can talk all the b.s you want . As far as deluded ? lol .....No that started with your first post . I think were done here .......lol ! This user has practically self - admitted and self - exposed themselves as a troll (even if indirectly). Read through my previous response to learn why. It continues to get more and more hilarious.

You miss the point every time. The fact that it's the way to divide boxers into categories doesn't mean weight is the main factor in stopping someome or being stopped. Size is. And with size tends to come weight. This doesnt mean adding more weight adds more power or chin. Stoppages often don't come down to power anyway. They come from being hit too often. Lack of being stopped isn't always due to chin. Mostly, it's due to not being hit. Both of these are aided by size. The fact that Julius Long has been knocked out proves my point better than it does yours. A massive man like him, should have a great chin, according to your theory. But he had a bad defense. He was stopped early by someone I actually know in Audley Harrison, who was never a big puncher, but hit Long accurately and got him out. Valuev had a better defence than Long, better skills. And a better chin, I'm not saying a big man can't have a great chin. But as Long proves, it's not weight equals chin. Now you were the one comparing Valuev to Holyfield chin for chin and saying Valuevs was better. But one took on Lewis twice Bowe three times, Moorer twice, Foreman, Tyson the list goes one. Valuevs best opponent was Haye. If you can't see the difference in calibre between the quality of opposition then that's your problem. This, again Mr TV repair man, is why a man who only looks at figures on pieces of paper doesn't know as much about boxing as the people in boxing. You miss the whole human side of it. As for personal attacks, I don't remember attacking you. Were not face to face and nobody is getting hurt. I'm not offended that you have your opinion and think that because the numbers tell you bigger tends to get stopped less and stop others more then even bigger, in the only way you can get bigger, gaining weight, is even better. I don't get offended when you talk about toddlers and spelling and other irrelevant rubbish. Ive given my theory in regards to chin. I haven't seen one from you. There's a big discrepancy between men of the same weight in how well they take punches, that, if it's weight that's the main factor, shouldn't be there. So what's the difference between these people? As someone who now takes punches in sparring as a hobby but still with trains fighters I'd love to know.. 1) Well what is the 'main factor' for having weight divisions in the first place then if not for it being the main factor for the likelihood of knocking out an opponent and not being knocked out in return for the heavier boxer? In addition, why are there multiple examples of multiple boxers having a CAREER lower KO percentage against heavier opponents than against lighter opponents? 2) Size is. And with size tends to come weight. What's that supposed to mean? 3) If we REMOVE the word 'power' with the word 'KNOCKOUT CAPABILITIES', then my argument still stands, which is that the likelihood of a boxer knocking out heavier opposition will be lower than against lighter opposition. Whether it's 'power', or whether it's mystical 'OTHER FACTORS', my argument still stands, Which is that heavier boxers NORMALLY will have the better punch resistance and KNOCKOUT CAPABILITIES (replacing the word 'power') than lighter boxers. 4) Like with the word 'power', if we replace the word 'chin' with the word 'KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE', then my argument still stands, which is that heavier boxers will NORMALLY be less likely to get knocked out than lighter boxers. At this point, it appears you're just playing around with semantics. 5) Julius Long getting knocked out proves that being TALL doesn't make you as resistant to getting knocked out as you have been claiming all along (making excuses for why Valuev has never been knocked out). Julius Long is naturally lighter than Nikolai Valuev but practically the exact same height. 6) My reason for comparing Holyfield to Valuev was to demonstrate that the best heaviest boxers with the greatest PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN have even better PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN than the best lightest boxers with the best PUNCH RESISTANCE / KNOCKOUT RESISTANCE / CHIN and my point is evidently true. 7) David Haye has a better knockout record at modern heavyweight than anybody Evander Holyfield fought, except Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis. With the exception of Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis and perhaps George Foreman, the caliber of opposition both Holyfield and Valuev fought on average are comparable at heavyweight. 8) Criticizing my knowledge and profession is irrelevant. You're yet to actually offer a logically sound & valid rebuttal argument. Are there others who know more about boxing than me? ABSOLUTELY! However, does their claims automatically become true just because they claimed something without those claims being substantiated? ABSOLUTELY NOT! 9) Do you even know what an Ad Hominem (personal attack) is? Read this to learn about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem I didn't claim you physically attacked me. You were verbally attacking my character / personality, which is a logical fallacy. Seriously, you're seriously exposing basic lack of knowledge in logic that anybody with average intelligence should be aware of, including pre-teens. Perhaps stay out of boxing for awhile and take some logic courses? That might be more important for your life. 10) You've given your 'theory' but they aren't substantiated. Thus, no objective individual has any reason to accept them. My arguments have been substantiated by evidence, statistics and logically laid out data. 11) When two boxers are the same weight, other factors come into play and that's when those other factors are significant. However, when two boxers weigh different, weight is more significant and those other factors become less significant. Hence, the purpose of having weight divisions. I don't care what you accept. The evidence and science does not suggest that adding weight improves punch resistance. You are taking this from numbers that you see on paper, and numbers are misleading. No matter how many times you claim it, there is no mechanism for 20lb of belly flab to protect you from being concussed by a left hook to the head. The reason people in the game know this is we see plenty of experiments in giving and receiving punishment, including experiencing it ourselves. The reason people in the fight game know this is everything has been tried to improve punch resistance and punching power already. If it is the weight why the difference between men of the same weight? Btw, you may well have taken that comment back in your answer to another poster. But it's still a comment that proves youre out of your depth talking about actual boxing. You need to see a few punches thrown in reality to think a man like Tyson would be an annoyance to anyone of any size. And you need to see abit of sparring up close to think that being unable to handle a heavyweights power is the reason men under 200lb don't box heavyweights these days, even though we know they can do so and win. 200lb is not a magic number. James Toney wouldve beaten Ruiz at 193 just like Jones did. Just because the weight categories are what they are doesnt make a guys chin change with weight. No matter how many times you say it 1) I don't care what you accept. Then why are you making claims then in a public thread? It's not just me not accepting your unsubstantiated claims but any objective individual. Either you're making claims because you want others to accept your claims. Or, you're just doing it for the sake of it (in which case you've just exposed yourself indirectly as a troll). 2) The evidence (statistics) do suggest that weight improves punch resistance. Science also does. There's a thing called 'MOMENTUM'. If you knew what it was, you would know how it affects punch resistance and power. If you didn't, then perhaps research upon it. 3) , and numbers are misleading. A typical reproach against my analyses is to shout "Stats! Stats! Stats! Your stats don't tell the whole story". Well, fortunately for me "Stats! Stats! Stats!" are "Facts! Facts! Facts!" thus anyone complaining about statistics is complaining about reality ("Arithmetic is not an opinion"). It's true, that a statistic like "1 KO in 1 fight = 100% KO'ratio" is ridiculous but a record of 30, 40, 50 and more fights _IS_ representative. You _CAN_ deduct things from it. You _CAN_ interpret it correctly. 4) Me making the statement (paraphrasing) 'Mike Tyson will be a minor irritant' was something called 'OVER EXAGGERATION'. Ever heard of that word before? Even if it was an error, if I've already accepted the error and am ready to move on, then why should there be any need for you to bring it up again? One mistake has no bearing on my other arguments (which aren't directly connected). 4) Sparring and REAL bouts are SIGNIFICANTLY different. As in, I don't need to see sparring to know acknowledge why heavyweights (200 pounders) aren't allowed to fight opponents weighing below 200 pounds. Sparring sessions have no bearing on why the heavyweight division exists and why 200 pounders at heavyweight aren't allowed to fight sub - heavyweights. 200 might not be a 'magic' number, but it is a very IMPORTANT and SIGNIFICANT number, just like numbers 175, 168, 160, 154 and 147 are. Hence, the rule makers decided to divide boxers by those weight values / numbers.

What titles has Minuwa won in MT ? Why doesnt his MMA record reflect his superiority ? No hes NOT WORLD class in any singular art which you are again deflecting . I DO know the likes of PHIL NURSE and my friend beside me are LEVELS over anyone in MT you ever seen,i dont need to follow MT to understand that. Im pretty sure ive been around dozens of guys including my own martial arts lineage guys (some even got inducted to the hall of fame when such as evenMuhammed Ali was awarded one in 2015 for boxing achievements ,you can look that up ...MARTAL ARTS HALL OF FAME with Cythia Rothrock...i WAS there ) who have significant more power kicks . You are off your rocker if you think Minuwa would show me anything i havent seen before ! You said Jimi wasn't world class. He's sport is MMA. He's top five at he's weight and arguably the best striker. Thats world class. You do realise there are alot of K1 fighter in the UFC? You do realise that this gym is full of Muay Thai fighters? You don't know who the Keddles are do you? The son, Kieren, was a pro Muay Thai fighter whos gym claimed 5 World titles in it first year. You know he is a former Muay Thai champion and has coached at least 12 world champions. Still wanna guarantee you punch harder than these guys kick? Levels above anyone I've ever seen? Hahaha . Seriously deluded.

I guarantee my guys hit harder than them ,and i hit harder than they do . I dont follow MT ,i do know the guy standing next to me who is 200 pounds now is as good as good as Phil Nurse in skills ...look that name up Yes i was talking about Kicks vs my punches . I trained with WORLD class caliber ,Manuwa is not WORLD class hes decent power big athlete . Rest assured i never fought or grappled anyone who didn't tell me i wasnt the strongest if not p4p the strongest they met . O.K enough of the pissing contest for now ....im out .lol I promise you nobody you know punches harder than Jimi kicks. To say that he's not world class is a joke. He's a top five light heavy, and maybe the number one striker at that weight in the world. And Dinos shin against your fist, well, I know you don't follow Muay Thai now lol. That's as silly as statement as anyone has made on this thread and that's saying something. Number two is Manuwa isn't world class Have a day off..

"Well I disagree, I don't think Wlad would've overpowered him at 230 at all" You would be wrong and ignorant to not notice how well trained Klitchko was for this fight ! Certainly Joshuas physical girth prevented Klitchko from using long period clinching . Whyte caught Joshua coming in on blind spot ....,this doubles the power in itself besides not seeing a left field hook . Both guys are over 240 so im not sure what significance this shows other than a bigger Joshuas more durability . Wlad NOT being an inside fighter and technical punching to Bowes looping ones would also have nothing to do with nothing .If you knew Bowe you would than know his lazy work ethic (i do and knew of it long before anyone on here bc my uncle trained him briefly in PAL GG at as young teen and everything he said came true ) Now you still want to play this game ? Im not even sure where your going here ,your all over the place . The simple fact is no one who TRULY understands combat would tell you weight doesnt matter or become an advantage more than a disadvantage (talking logically )....weight classes were CREATED bc of this .....END OF DISCUSSION . M.Tyson hit hrder at 215/220 bc he was 5'10 and had SPEED in a tank like frame which also gave accurate punches . When you add SPEED /ACCURACY/TECHNIQUE and have mass behind it , it makes a punch that harder. Another point that should not be this hard to figure out . Are we talking about Wlad clinching him or overpowering him? I'm talking about Wlad fights at range and Bowe moved in on fighters, including tall ones like Joshua, used he's weight to move them around, hit them to the body and worked then with uppercuts.He way he overpowered Gonzalez for instance. Yeah Wlads weight helps him lean on you but that wouldn't have prevented Joshua scoring from the outside, it didn't stop others men from dropping him. I know Bowe squandered he's talent, it doesn't mean when he was at he's best he didn't work you over, inside better than almost any tall heavyweight ever. You know some from the gym with him,but I know someone, Herbie Hide who got bashed up by him. But I guess my point was being so heavy for Wlad wasnt so important for a tall guy like Joshua since Wlad doesn't punish the body or work inside at all. Therefore the girth was relatively unimportant in the context of this fight. Had it been a mauling Bowe, who holds you with the left and whacks you with the right I could see it. Your point about Tyson is exactly right. I absolutely agree with the factors that make a lighter guy a hard puncher. I've spent half this thread explaining how accuracy makes punchers too. Haye and Wilder have speed too.Funny enough, the man that stopped Joshua is very similar. They call him the Romanian Tyson.

Im 160/175 and hit harder than any HW at my gym ,some have even fought Wilder and tell me with 16 oz gloves i had heavier hands ...,see that short bald guy in my sig ? Thats the former world Muay Thai champion who has kicks harder thsn any punch youve seen ,who says my punches do more damage on the same bag we work on . Youre trying to deflect reality with someone with well OVER 20 years in martial arts /boxing and MMA traing of various arts so good luck with that ! Guess what ? It means shyte bc it doesnt change anything ive been posting on here bc i MYSELF CANT bethe deciding factor suggesting size is unimportant and is not an advantage bc it STILL would be!:cool2: Continue on with your straw man angles bc thats all your doing here . I wouldve thought your first paragraph proves what I said about power then. Im not bothered about your credentials, I'm telling you how I know weight doesn't equal power. I know kicks are harder than punches, if you know martial arts then I think you know who Jimi Manuwa is. If you know Muay Thai you know who Dino Mirigou is. I don't know if you were saying your punches are harder than a Muay Thai champions kicks? I promise you your punches, mine and anyone else on this site don't punch harder than Jimi Manuwa and Dino Mirigou kick. Remember, I shared a gym with Danny Williams, Henry Akinwande. I sparred Derek Angol on and off for years. 31 fights, 28 wins 24 KOs. British commonwealth cruiser champion,and definitely a puncher. I'm not jonny come lately off the street. That don't mean I think I know it all. But, just like Mike Tyson told Smithy," weight has nothing whatsoever relevance to how hard a guy hits, I've sparred 250lb men that couldnt break an egg, and a man like Tommy Hearns could kill you" . And I agree with him . I agree that size is important, but not weight in relation to punching power, as you, by your first paragraph, should know better than anyone then.

"Don't you think he could've beat Wlad at 230?" At 18 fights ....NO. Wlad would have over powered him physically on the inside . Which is WHY he came in at 250 . In a rematch he will come in slightly lighter with better grasp on how to fight Klitchko . "It doesnt take a man of 250 to knock Klitchko out " Nothing to do about nothing . The same shot he took from the SAME guy would not have TKO'd him today wherehes very dazed JUST like Whytes HARDER punches didnt K.O him in an actual pro fight bc like it did in the ams bc he was put together more and when you have a WELL trained 240 plus guy WE all see the result with what Joshua has done so far .Wlad didnt just hit him once with one hard shot did he ? lol Really this shouldn't be that hard to figure out. Well I disagree, I don't think Wlad would've overpowered him at 230 at all, just like he didnt with so many men that weight. Wlad isn't dare I even say it to you, Riddick Bowe, who smashed big guys on the inside with uppercuts.He have stayed at range like he did with Haye, hell, even with Chambers, and when Joshua caught him and knocked him down in the fifth he probably would've finished him off, like some light folks have, instead of spending the next 3 minutes so lactic than he ended up nearly getting done over himself. What I was saying about the amateur fight Joshua got stopped in was it was nowhere near how he looked in the middle of the Wlad fight, it just got stopped too soon because the silly amatuer game is like that. Do you know the fight he got knocked down with against Whyte was the fourth fight Joshua had ever had, Whyte was quite an experienced K1 fighter. Plus, again Josh got caught with a nice two punch combination on the chin, not just one left hook, had he caught Joshua with the same follow up right hand, who knows. Joshua didn't get KOd in that fight either. Inexperience causes at least some of these things, Chris Eubank was halted in 22 seconds in he's first fight. Nistor, who let's face it didn't exactly flatten Joshua, is a hard puncher by reputation in the amatuer game. He was a southpaw, and Joshua had no idea how to get out the way of that left. Who knows what Nistor could be? . If he actually hit Joshua now, not saying he's at the skill level, but as far as chins, if he hit Joshua with the same shots now you think he wouldn't stun him the same? Because he's a 16 stoner .16 stone southpaw have done giant young superheavies before. But I digress. I agree with you Joshua will be better if he comes in at 240 for the rematch this time. I don't just disagree with you for fun. It's just an opinion.

Joshuas power increased with weight . This is obvious if you watched his fights MORE than once ALL of them....Im pretty sure ive seen them ALL no less than ten times bc i like knowing what im talking about (most ppl THINK they know ) Joshua didnt get knocked out by Klitchko at 250 ,he was TKO'd at around 230 in the ams by FAR less punchers (but power punchers ) ! My last response answers all this . Do you know how much actual boxing work Tony Simms has put in with Joshua? The guy trained me and is a great trainer. Of course everything has improved since he was an amateur. Did you see the stoppage Joshua suffered in the amateurs? It wouldn't have been stopped like that in the pros. Nor is he's the same fighter in the pros. This is what I mean by seeing half a story.Joshau is from a weightlifting background anyway. So are alot of fighters. He might think it helps him. So did Bruno. Maybe in clinches, I'll give you that. He's just a more effective, more experienced, better fighter now than when he made he's debut. Don't you think he could've beat Wlad at 230? This is where we differ. It doesn't take a man of 250 to knock Wlad out, we know that much for sure.

I only see you are now not just contradicting in a minor way anymore ,you are now fully doing it with this post . This entire post sums up what YOU were saying wasnt true but now it is . As for the last sentence ,almost any fighter at 175 6'1 who adds better dimensions for the height of at ileast 200/220 pounds is going to hit harder almost always . You yourself dont win over proven logic and examples . Theirs a BIG differance getting hit by guys below 200 and guys over 220 .....theres a BIG differance getting hit by guys at 210 and over 225 on average . Sorry this is a FACT . Weight classes WERE created bc of guys who could out last smaller skilled ones bc in general they absorb sustained punishment longer . FACT . This would be at ANY weight , few examples that goes against that doesn't change logic even if god told you so . lol So in terms of power you are saying that me being a good hitter at 175,by adding 20lbs would make me hit harder? I've been around enough and sparred people who have varied in weight when they've been close to a fight or out for a while and over the weight to know this isn't true. It's also not true of the guys who have changed divisions that I know of. Its also according to Evander Holyfield, not true of himself, who said adding the weight didn't make him hit any harder. You say there is a big difference between the power of men of 210 compared to men above 225 on average. This is not even the case in my own gym, where everyone who has shared a ring with 210lb Jimi Manuwa, an MMA fighter will happily tell you he hits harder than any heavyweight here, including Dillian Whyte, who spent most of he's drug suspension here. Its just not true in my experience. Now I'm not saying bigger men aren't more difficult in many ways. I'm saying that I've seen enough guys like Enzo Macrinelli knock out very well known and durable heavyweight title challengers in sparring to know there isn't this big gulf in power between smaller power punchers and the and larger ones. I'm not contradicting anything. Nobody who's bulked up with weights or fat that i know of has improved their chin. Nobody has substantially improved their punch either, and heavyweight has the best examples of this since if it's a guy from a lighter division moving up he might either be fat at the end of he's career or fighting bigger longer men,so the example has other factors that might be affecting it. So heavyweight is the best place for that discussion it seems to me. A heavier Haye didn't hit harder, he hit harder when he was smaller and sharper according to Booth. Both Bowe and Lewis at their heaviest, seemed to lose effectiveness (Golota 1,Rahnam 1, Klitschko ect) or Tyson when he was heavier than usual (Nielsen, even Lewis, Williams, Mcbride) although I will give you that some of those fights it was due to age and generally slowing down. However, it still didn't seem to translate into more durability or power. A heavier Bruno, aged 34, didn't seem to hit any harder or be any more durable against the same fighter when he was 2 stone heavier. Heavy Price seems to be the same but just less fit. By this logic about weight, 300lb Miller should be in a class of he's own for power. Did heavier Tua do any better against Rahnam the 2nd time. No, he only got a draw and floored for the first time in he's career. You are better at your natural weight, bulking up artificially, or eating too much and getting a spare tire doesn't nothing for either chin or power.

I was actually going to TRY and make it through this one but really no need to go past this point , i'll wait until tab breaks this down as usual with logic! " The fact that the most sensible way to divide boxers into categories doesn't mean weight is the main factor in stopping someome or being stopped. Size is. And with size tends to come weight." :wtf1: Talk about Topsey turvey .......Topsy-turvy: in or into great disorder or confusion ! :crazy: What I'm also saying, going back to how this started is that Joshua, a guy of 6 foot 6, in my opinion, doesn't necessarily have a chin advantage over the other men of similar height that Tyson fought, just because he's heavier and more muscular.Men like Green and Tucker, may have been lighter, but may well be more durable. I mean maybe not, but the fact hes 249 doesn't give him any edge in this department. If he has a better chin than them then it's be because he does. Same with power. Does he hit harder than Bruno, Bonecrusher, Ruddock? Maybe, but it isn't so because he had the weight on them. Well not Bruno. He was 247.I remember Joshua on superstars, he weighed 230 and I think he said he was 16 percent body fat. He was an amazing athlete. I think he weighed 230 on he's debut.Was it really necessary to add 19lbs. Maybe he thought it was. I know he went on a neck program because he thought it'd help him take shots. That I can see. Everyone does it. Anyway hope that's made my position clearer. You don't have to agree, that's life I guess.