What Makes a Good Chin (it’s not what you think)

I am often appalled at how little about biophysics posters on here know. They seem to think that bigger is always better in a fight. However, they could not be more wrong. In fact, size is often one of the least important factors in a fight. What is important is speed, agility, and strength. These are the qualities that determine who will win a fight, not size. I will give an example. Evander Holyfield was slightly lighter and leaner than Mike Tyson when they fought on the 9th of November 1996, and yet he pushed him around the ring en route to a memorable and an historic win on that night. I think what surprises me most about this is in a lot of posts I see regarding two of the best heavyweights of this generation, Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder. First of all, posters state that Tyson Fury cannot be defeated by Oleksandr Usyk because Oleksandr is comparatively small. They might be right, but in my opinion, we’ll never know until they fight. Usyk uses his opponents weaknesses to his advantage, and he turns their strengths into weaknesses. While Fury may indeed emerge victorious in the end, I foresee it being down to his indomitable will and his Mayweather-like ability to adapt to difficult situations. But I don’t see him bullying Usyk like he was able to do against Wilder. I think the posters’ errors lie mainly in the metaphorical neurogenesis of thought of that moment of being astonished at how easily Fury was able to bully Wilder and get up from his punches, and ascribe this only to his large size. I remember the amazing moments from all those fights, they are one of those things like when the Berlin Wall fell that people simply remember in their subconscious. They knew where they were when it happened, what color shirt they had on, and what they ate and drank that night for dinner. Where they go wrong is that they take this example and state the obvious, namely that Usyk is much smaller than Wilder, and extrapolate this into a firm, and to themselves, an ironclad conclusion that Usyk would fare similar as Wilder did, only much worse due to his smaller size and relative lack of knockout power. I think this shows a certain level of immaturity, an inability to read the coffee pot. This leads me to my second point, mainly that I am even more astonished at how many posters on this site seem so uninitiated to what would make a person difficult to knock out. For example, it is often stated on here that Fighter A (let’s be honest, usually it’s stated in reference to Deontay) would most certainly defeat, or have defeated, Fighter B by devastating knockout, because only Tyson Fury was able to get up, and that only because he is so big. I hypothesize that size was only a small part of it. There are more important factors involved such as skull density, thickness, and level of hydration. And as anyone who has studied physics knows, a lower center of gravity is advantageous for balance and the will to survive. This is because it is easier to stay upright and not fall over when the center of gravity is low. If someone does fall, it is easier to get back up again. A lower center of gravity also makes it easier to move around in general and have good agility. Don’t believe me? Take a skilled soccer midfielder like N’golo Kante, and compare his agility and balance to that of a skilled basketball center like Nikola Jokic. While both are tremendous athletes, Kante will be lightyears ahead of Jokic in terms of balance and agility. This is why I would like to postulate that a heavyweight who is comparatively short, has a great chin, good agility, fast hands, and has shown he can get up from a hard punch could quite possibly actually be a tougher opponent for Wilder than Fury himself. With that said, not every shorter, stockier heavyweight is prime Tua. And I think that Fury’s win against Wilder may be more down to his incredible spirit and indomitable will than anything else. Only time will tell, but I think that posters on this site should have a more open mind about what it would take, or has taken in the past, to beat Wilder, and not marry themselves so easily to the conclusion that Fury only beat Wilder and took his power well due to his enormous size. I am not trying to come up with any sort of crazy theory on here, and have proven time and again that I neither detract from Fury and Wilder, nor do I think either of them are as unbeatable as their most fervent fans claim. Lets keep an open mind, and approach the discussion with an appreciation of the way things work in physics and everyday life. Wilder is not a machine nor a magician. He is a human being who operates according to the same biophysical principles as anyone else, and these can be exploited and negated under the right conditions. Likewise, Fury is an astonishingly good and agile fighter for his height and size, but he too has weaknesses that could be used against him by the right, adequately skilled smaller heavyweight. Usyk very well may be that heavyweight. Sometimes confusion reigns with respect to attribute: and qualities of attribute. So clarification would demand that you define "Size" and consider whether your observation is about fighting, or specific to boxing. While Chin determination is a boxing category, the qualities that make a good chin can be universal to fighting, or more specific to boxing. lets start with qualifying "size." Is it pure heft? what about reach? are we talking pure weight? Muscle mass? Heavyweight boxing has shown some correlations with weight changes into modern times, but not a real absolute relationship: For every lewis, Fury there is a Holyfield, Wilder and Usyk. meanwhile, generally speaking, larger fighters tend to have greater reach... Reach as an advantage extends to other weight classes as well... We might then call reach an independent attribute of size. It correlates to size, but not absolutely and with caveats. Then we have bone size. Some fighters, like Wilder and Usyk are not as big framed as other fighters... Yet the differences in weight can be negligable. So... Liston may have weighed about what Usyk does (give, or take a few pounds) But Liston was obviously bigger... He had much bigger hands, legs, neck, etc. Muscle mass is another "quality" of size. We know that more muscle mass can actually be a detriment to a fighter. Ditto for Fat which at least not ambivalent... Nobody really wants to come in "fatter" for a fight. A good deal of "advantage" assigned to size has to do with gross differences in weight between two opponents. The assumption, you rightly note, is that the bigger man has an advantage. If we are talking specifically about classical boxing, especially regarding gloves, a stronger opponent has an advantage because to generate power one has to swing the arms and create speed and impact. Before gloves, Size was hardly an advantage. In fact, the strength of ones hands was singularly important, because force was generated using bio mechanics and placement... Swinging hard and hitting a bone target would instantly cripple one because their hand would break. A piston movement of an inverted fist to the chin tip was the KO blow, and as Fitz did to Corbett the solar plexis shot was often used, along with hooking to the ribs. Specifically regarding one's chin, certainly the strength of the neck muscles, the density of skull bone mass is important, but at least equally important is the ability of the opponent not to be suprised by a sudden punch. So... good peripheral vision may be equally important as skull density in this department. Most people would be shocked to find that this visual field is best accessed from the corner of the eye, and not looking directly at the opponent. Movement sensors are in that part of the eye, most likely an archiac trait from when we branched off from animals that needed to sense movement to survive, usually herbivores, like cows and such, ergo their eyes are on the side of their head so they can always be watching, in the general direction they are oriented. The traits of toughness and willfullness are also important.

I am often appalled at how little about biophysics posters on here know. They seem to think that bigger is always better in a fight. However, they could not be more wrong. In fact, size is often one of the least important factors in a fight. What is important is speed, agility, and strength. These are the qualities that determine who will win a fight, not size. I will give an example. Evander Holyfield was slightly lighter and leaner than Mike Tyson when they fought on the 9th of November 1996, and yet he pushed him around the ring en route to a memorable and an historic win on that night. I think what surprises me most about this is in a lot of posts I see regarding two of the best heavyweights of this generation, Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder. First of all, posters state that Tyson Fury cannot be defeated by Oleksandr Usyk because Oleksandr is comparatively small. They might be right, but in my opinion, we’ll never know until they fight. Usyk uses his opponents weaknesses to his advantage, and he turns their strengths into weaknesses. While Fury may indeed emerge victorious in the end, I foresee it being down to his indomitable will and his Mayweather-like ability to adapt to difficult situations. But I don’t see him bullying Usyk like he was able to do against Wilder. I think the posters’ errors lie mainly in the metaphorical neurogenesis of thought of that moment of being astonished at how easily Fury was able to bully Wilder and get up from his punches, and ascribe this only to his large size. I remember the amazing moments from all those fights, they are one of those things like when the Berlin Wall fell that people simply remember in their subconscious. They knew where they were when it happened, what color shirt they had on, and what they ate and drank that night for dinner. Where they go wrong is that they take this example and state the obvious, namely that Usyk is much smaller than Wilder, and extrapolate this into a firm, and to themselves, an ironclad conclusion that Usyk would fare similar as Wilder did, only much worse due to his smaller size and relative lack of knockout power. I think this shows a certain level of immaturity, an inability to read the coffee pot. This leads me to my second point, mainly that I am even more astonished at how many posters on this site seem so uninitiated to what would make a person difficult to knock out. For example, it is often stated on here that Fighter A (let’s be honest, usually it’s stated in reference to Deontay) would most certainly defeat, or have defeated, Fighter B by devastating knockout, because only Tyson Fury was able to get up, and that only because he is so big. I hypothesize that size was only a small part of it. There are more important factors involved such as skull density, thickness, and level of hydration. And as anyone who has studied physics knows, a lower center of gravity is advantageous for balance and the will to survive. This is because it is easier to stay upright and not fall over when the center of gravity is low. If someone does fall, it is easier to get back up again. A lower center of gravity also makes it easier to move around in general and have good agility. Don’t believe me? Take a skilled soccer midfielder like N’golo Kante, and compare his agility and balance to that of a skilled basketball center like Nikola Jokic. While both are tremendous athletes, Kante will be lightyears ahead of Jokic in terms of balance and agility. This is why I would like to postulate that a heavyweight who is comparatively short, has a great chin, good agility, fast hands, and has shown he can get up from a hard punch could quite possibly actually be a tougher opponent for Wilder than Fury himself. With that said, not every shorter, stockier heavyweight is prime Tua. And I think that Fury’s win against Wilder may be more down to his incredible spirit and indomitable will than anything else. Only time will tell, but I think that posters on this site should have a more open mind about what it would take, or has taken in the past, to beat Wilder, and not marry themselves so easily to the conclusion that Fury only beat Wilder and took his power well due to his enormous size. I am not trying to come up with any sort of crazy theory on here, and have proven time and again that I neither detract from Fury and Wilder, nor do I think either of them are as unbeatable as their most fervent fans claim. Lets keep an open mind, and approach the discussion with an appreciation of the way things work in physics and everyday life. Wilder is not a machine nor a magician. He is a human being who operates according to the same biophysical principles as anyone else, and these can be exploited and negated under the right conditions. Likewise, Fury is an astonishingly good and agile fighter for his height and size, but he too has weaknesses that could be used against him by the right, adequately skilled smaller heavyweight. Usyk very well may be that heavyweight. This post is all over the place and does almost nothing to define what makes a good chin. Size does matter which is why you dont see featherweights knocking out heavyweights. (appreciation of the way things work in physics and everyday life) Fury's size is most definitely why he was able to get up from Wilder's punches. And it's why Usyk WONT beat Fury.

being extremely well conditioned Strong we trained thick neck being well hydrated and not a brutal weight cut Not being Pakistani

A good chin is when power is absorbed downwards instead of upwards so u get shaken to yer boots instead of your brain, its partially do do with the shape of your jaw area

Good reflexes make for great chins Minus that, seeing the shot coming and rolling with it helps. Tucking your chin also helps. Usually, it's temple and ear shots that are hard to take.

The makeup of a good chin is a strong neck/jaw and conditioning Yet fighters without that have shown good chins and fighters with that have been left lying on the floor, there is no simple rule, on the contrary, a lot of complexity, and strangely its also not a constant, meaning somebody can take more at a certain time than he could on another day for any number of reasons.

Good chin is also about recovery. You can have a durable face and big heart, but if you can't recover fast enough after going down or even getting buzzed initially, you are going to get stopped or ko'ed eventually.

Canelo is an interesting case. Very nearly knocked out by José Miguel Cotto, a journeyman at best, at 149 pounds. Yet after years of hard fighting, he was able to walk through punches from GGG and Sergey Kovalev, two of the hardest punchers at middleweight and light heavyweight. Legit? I have trouble buying it. His chin and his power got better at higher weight classes. That’s not usually the way it’s supposed to work. He was probably very tight at the weight, which effected his punch resistance. Tony Bellew is a good example, was dropped by Ajisafe, McKenzie and destroyed by Stevenson at 175. But was able to absorb shots from David Haye up at HW.

Yeah, I often use Juan Manuel Marquez as an example for this It’s funny because people just look at the knockdown and assume the fighter can’t take a punch because they got put down, but there’s so many factors involved in why fighter could go on the floor. Cunningham putting fury down is a good example. The only reason fury goes down from that shot it is because he was just completely squared up and if you get caught completely square like that with a hard enough shot, that there’s really no place to go apart from backwards and down, it doesn’t necessarily mean you are badly hurt. Froch had a great chin, but he also got caught completely square and crossing his feet against Groves and hit with a shot that could only send him down on his back, although he was actually hurt from that because Groves was a big puncher and got a free shot. But if Froch wasn’t so square on, that shot probably buzzes him, but possibly doesn’t actually put him on the floor. A lot of knockdowns are just fighters putting themselves in bad positions with their balance and positioning. A lot of people don’t seem to think about these things. pretty much anyone can get buzzed anyway, but it’s really how you recover. I think the notion of a bad and good chin is sometimes overstated, and the bigger problem is fighters who get hit and stay hit. Although there is a few that just can’t take a shot whatsoever . Groves timed that shot perfect man, it showed how good Froch’s chin was cause most fighters would have been sleeping after getting caught like that. I’ve still never forgiven Howard Foster for ruining a potential ATG fight too. That’s the most p***ed off I’ve ever been at a fight.

What do you propose? I know Canelo has tested positive for PED’s, I’m just not sure how those would help his chin, save for conditioning. Meth enables people to endure incredible pain and keep fighting, but that’s something different. Please explain? Steroids, resulting in super physiological levels of testosterone, absolutely would help someone walk through punches. Strong, fit, aggressive athletes will always be able to take more punishment than those not similarly endowed. It happened in the UFC some years ago when they allowed fighters to “supplement” with testosterone. It was a disaster and they quickly stopped that policy. Obviously, Canelo has only tested positive once. I am just pointing out that I think it’s strange that as he has gone up in weight, his power and his chin have increased. That’s the opposite of what you usually see.

Canelo is an interesting case. Very nearly knocked out by José Miguel Cotto, a journeyman at best, at 149 pounds. Yet after years of hard fighting, he was able to walk through punches from GGG and Sergey Kovalev, two of the hardest punchers at middleweight and light heavyweight. Legit? I have trouble buying it. His chin and his power got better at higher weight classes. That’s not usually the way it’s supposed to work. What do you propose? I know Canelo has tested positive for PED’s, I’m just not sure how those would help his chin, save for conditioning. Meth enables people to endure incredible pain and keep fighting, but that’s something different. Please explain?

Your word picture reminds me a lot of a particular punch Canelo took from Daniel Jacobs. It was a hard punch, but he rode it well. Even though it thudded ominously, Canelo clearly has a good chin and also knows how to take it in the right way. Another example is the third Wilder - Fury fight, where Wilder set up the exact same shot off the ropes that he would later use to knock out Helenius. Fury seemed to take a much cleaner version of that shot, and he quickly moved his forehead foreword and down so as not to take the shot on the chin. Excellent response that probably prevented a TKO loss. Canelo is an interesting case. Very nearly knocked out by José Miguel Cotto, a journeyman at best, at 149 pounds. Yet after years of hard fighting, he was able to walk through punches from GGG and Sergey Kovalev, two of the hardest punchers at middleweight and light heavyweight. Legit? I have trouble buying it. His chin and his power got better at higher weight classes. That’s not usually the way it’s supposed to work.

getting dropped does not mean you have a weak chin, proof of that is one of my all time favorites JMM, JMM been dropped multiple times in his Hall of Fame Career but was NEVER Stopped not even by a Prime Power Punching Pacman So going down doesn't not indicate a "WEAK CHIN" and I argue this for Beterbiev as well currently who people think has a Suspect Chin, same with Andrade, Haney and a few other current fighters who some fans hate so much that they claim they have a suspect Chin because they was Buckled in a fight Fury clearly has a great chin to take Wilder's Power Not Once, Not Twice but THREE Times and getting up from his Power Repeatedly and not only finishing those fights but winning them (Long Count, He Cheated Blah Blah Blah get over it Wilder Fans WTF) When you have a Weak Chin, you don't get up or you don't recover from Big Shots, my All Time Favorite Heavyweight Lennox Lewis had that Weak Chin label. Late Great Emmanuel Steward made him fight at a Slower Pace and use that Long Jab and his Chin held up for the rest of his Legendary Career so you can work around a Suspect Chin for sure. Did the Same with Wlad as well. Yeah, I often use Juan Manuel Marquez as an example for this It’s funny because people just look at the knockdown and assume the fighter can’t take a punch because they got put down, but there’s so many factors involved in why fighter could go on the floor. Cunningham putting fury down is a good example. The only reason fury goes down from that shot it is because he was just completely squared up and if you get caught completely square like that with a hard enough shot, that there’s really no place to go apart from backwards and down, it doesn’t necessarily mean you are badly hurt. Froch had a great chin, but he also got caught completely square and crossing his feet against Groves and hit with a shot that could only send him down on his back, although he was actually hurt from that because Groves was a big puncher and got a free shot. But if Froch wasn’t so square on, that shot probably buzzes him, but possibly doesn’t actually put him on the floor. A lot of knockdowns are just fighters putting themselves in bad positions with their balance and positioning. A lot of people don’t seem to think about these things. pretty much anyone can get buzzed anyway, but it’s really how you recover. I think the notion of a bad and good chin is sometimes overstated, and the bigger problem is fighters who get hit and stay hit. Although there is a few that just can’t take a shot whatsoever .

The ostensible topic is “what makes a good chin,” yet the OP made a case for attributes other than sheer size making the better fighter. I don’t think anyone with reasonable knowledge of combat sports would argue that size is the most important factor in a fight. But as the old adage goes: all things being equal, a good big man will always beat a good little man. That notion ought to fit in neatly with the attempt to examine fight phenomena through physics — mass x acceleration = force.

What makes a good chin, seeing the punch and the ability to take the power of the punch, a very subtle subconscious looseness at the moment of impact, the second line of defence comes to the muscle and structure to absorb the power lessening the brain whip, then driving it all is the character of the fighter at his core, is he game, is he stubborn, is he determined, all contribute to taking a hard punch. Outstanding analysis. I agree a good chin is partly a function of things we cannot see such as the “wiring” of the nervous system, allowing some fighters to take tremendous blows, while others fall over unconscious. Conditioning has something to do with it as well. Well conditioned athlete can take more punishment than a poorly conditioned athlete. I agree that “will” plays a role in whether someone is prepared to take a beating and get back up. However, will is overrated. Almost all high-level professionals are prepared to risk their lives in the ring. Anthony Joshua, for instance, lacks neither will, nor conditioning. However he has a poor chin for physiological reasons that we can’t understand. It will only get worse with time.

Pound for pound, Usyk is a by far better athlete than Tyson Fury 'If we want to get specific'. That is why, I have never banged on much about Fury's dimensions. Fury is no genetic marvel, and I don't think he this outstanding athlete to the level his hardcore fans and the media try to make out. But the man can fight, and he knows how to box 'There is no denying that'. Usyk would most likely beat Fury in every single athletic discipline within Track and Field Athletics. Sprinting, distance running, jumping, and throwing. I don't think Fury beats him in any single event. And I also think Usyk is stronger than Fury, in all compound gym based exercises. Overall I rate Usyk pound for pound to be a better athlete than Tyson Fury. People have to ask themselves this question? Who has Tyson Fury bulled about, and pushed around the ring? Has Fury in all honesty pushed another Super Heavyweight around the ring? No. Wilder has never been known for his brute strength, in fact his brute strength and overall stability are not his best attributes. It was impressive how Fury showed courage, and fought Wilder on the offensive 'During the second and third fights'. But I don't think it was a insurmountable achievement, to bull a fighter who he out weighed by 40 pounds around the ring 'A fighter who is not renowned for his brute strength'. Note: I have talked about and highlighted the narratives which Fury's hardcore fans create. And this narrative that Fury is this hulk like super heavyweight, that has this super strength is in all honesty complete nonsense. All of this is based off Fury pushing around Wilder, who is a fighter I rate highly 'But Wilder is also a fighter who is not really a strong Heavyweight, Wilder's brute strength is one of his worst attributes'. But let me make this very clear. Tyson Fury has a good level of strength, his strength inside the boxing ring is functional and specific 'I just don't rate Fury up there with the strongest Heavyweights of all-time' Fury is nowhere near them. Notice how Fury fights most if not all other super Heavyweights, Fury boxed and stayed clear of Kiltschko. And although I don't class Chisora or Whyte entirely as Super Heavyweights 'Fury again fought these two fighters at long range'. If Tyson Fury would of fought Anthony Joshua, I don't think he would of fought Joshua on the offensive. Fury would of attempted to try and out box Joshua from Mid-Long range, Fury is not bulling or pushing Joshua about. I still make Tyson Fury the favorite against Usyk. And stylistically, this is a fight were Fury can apply his superior inside game. But against another Super Heavyweight who is strong enough to not be pushed about by him? I think Tyson Fury will be reluctant to engage these fighters with his inside game.

getting dropped does not mean you have a weak chin, proof of that is one of my all time favorites JMM, JMM been dropped multiple times in his Hall of Fame Career but was NEVER Stopped not even by a Prime Power Punching Pacman So going down doesn't not indicate a "WEAK CHIN" and I argue this for Beterbiev as well currently who people think has a Suspect Chin, same with Andrade, Haney and a few other current fighters who some fans hate so much that they claim they have a suspect Chin because they was Buckled in a fight Fury clearly has a great chin to take Wilder's Power Not Once, Not Twice but THREE Times and getting up from his Power Repeatedly and not only finishing those fights but winning them (Long Count, He Cheated Blah Blah Blah get over it Wilder Fans WTF) When you have a Weak Chin, you don't get up or you don't recover from Big Shots, my All Time Favorite Heavyweight Lennox Lewis had that Weak Chin label. Late Great Emmanuel Steward made him fight at a Slower Pace and use that Long Jab and his Chin held up for the rest of his Legendary Career so you can work around a Suspect Chin for sure. Did the Same with Wlad as well.

Big wide head/jaw Thick short neck Dense bones

I am often appalled at how little about biophysics posters on here know. They seem to think that bigger is always better in a fight. However, they could not be more wrong. In fact, size is often one of the least important factors in a fight. What is important is speed, agility, and strength. These are the qualities that determine who will win a fight, not size. I will give an example. Evander Holyfield was slightly lighter and leaner than Mike Tyson when they fought on the 9th of November 1996, and yet he pushed him around the ring en route to a memorable and an historic win on that night. I think what surprises me most about this is in a lot of posts I see regarding two of the best heavyweights of this generation, Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder. First of all, posters state that Tyson Fury cannot be defeated by Oleksandr Usyk because Oleksandr is comparatively small. They might be right, but in my opinion, we’ll never know until they fight. Usyk uses his opponents weaknesses to his advantage, and he turns their strengths into weaknesses. While Fury may indeed emerge victorious in the end, I foresee it being down to his indomitable will and his Mayweather-like ability to adapt to difficult situations. But I don’t see him bullying Usyk like he was able to do against Wilder. I think the posters’ errors lie mainly in the metaphorical neurogenesis of thought of that moment of being astonished at how easily Fury was able to bully Wilder and get up from his punches, and ascribe this only to his large size. I remember the amazing moments from all those fights, they are one of those things like when the Berlin Wall fell that people simply remember in their subconscious. They knew where they were when it happened, what color shirt they had on, and what they ate and drank that night for dinner. Where they go wrong is that they take this example and state the obvious, namely that Usyk is much smaller than Wilder, and extrapolate this into a firm, and to themselves, an ironclad conclusion that Usyk would fare similar as Wilder did, only much worse due to his smaller size and relative lack of knockout power. I think this shows a certain level of immaturity, an inability to read the coffee pot. This leads me to my second point, mainly that I am even more astonished at how many posters on this site seem so uninitiated to what would make a person difficult to knock out. For example, it is often stated on here that Fighter A (let’s be honest, usually it’s stated in reference to Deontay) would most certainly defeat, or have defeated, Fighter B by devastating knockout, because only Tyson Fury was able to get up, and that only because he is so big. I hypothesize that size was only a small part of it. There are more important factors involved such as skull density, thickness, and level of hydration. And as anyone who has studied physics knows, a lower center of gravity is advantageous for balance and the will to survive. This is because it is easier to stay upright and not fall over when the center of gravity is low. If someone does fall, it is easier to get back up again. A lower center of gravity also makes it easier to move around in general and have good agility. Don’t believe me? Take a skilled soccer midfielder like N’golo Kante, and compare his agility and balance to that of a skilled basketball center like Nikola Jokic. While both are tremendous athletes, Kante will be lightyears ahead of Jokic in terms of balance and agility. This is why I would like to postulate that a heavyweight who is comparatively short, has a great chin, good agility, fast hands, and has shown he can get up from a hard punch could quite possibly actually be a tougher opponent for Wilder than Fury himself. With that said, not every shorter, stockier heavyweight is prime Tua. And I think that Fury’s win against Wilder may be more down to his incredible spirit and indomitable will than anything else. Only time will tell, but I think that posters on this site should have a more open mind about what it would take, or has taken in the past, to beat Wilder, and not marry themselves so easily to the conclusion that Fury only beat Wilder and took his power well due to his enormous size. I am not trying to come up with any sort of crazy theory on here, and have proven time and again that I neither detract from Fury and Wilder, nor do I think either of them are as unbeatable as their most fervent fans claim. Lets keep an open mind, and approach the discussion with an appreciation of the way things work in physics and everyday life. Wilder is not a machine nor a magician. He is a human being who operates according to the same biophysical principles as anyone else, and these can be exploited and negated under the right conditions. Likewise, Fury is an astonishingly good and agile fighter for his height and size, but he too has weaknesses that could be used against him by the right, adequately skilled smaller heavyweight. Usyk very well may be that heavyweight. No one is reading all that but good effort writing your thesis

What makes a good chin, seeing the punch and the ability to take the power of the punch, a very subtle subconscious looseness at the moment of impact, the second line of defence comes to the muscle and structure to absorb the power lessening the brain whip, then driving it all is the character of the fighter at his core, is he game, is he stubborn, is he determined, all contribute to taking a hard punch. Your word picture reminds me a lot of a particular punch Canelo took from Daniel Jacobs. It was a hard punch, but he rode it well. Even though it thudded ominously, Canelo clearly has a good chin and also knows how to take it in the right way. Another example is the third Wilder - Fury fight, where Wilder set up the exact same shot off the ropes that he would later use to knock out Helenius. Fury seemed to take a much cleaner version of that shot, and he quickly moved his forehead foreword and down so as not to take the shot on the chin. Excellent response that probably prevented a TKO loss.