It's actually impossible to gain punching power through gaining weight and "putting on" muscle

[BKM-]

The less common fighter who actually knows how to put his entire mass and force into punches will certainly increase his power by gaining weight.

As for what exactly makes someone a hard puncher, there's too many theories to count. What is certain is that it's not the myth that it comes from the legs.

[QueensburyRules]

Yeah but emaciated Manny was UNDERWEIGHT which is another factor all together. And emaciated Manny actually Hit very hard.

if we look at Mannys career, his punching power probably peaked in his left hand at 130 lbs. that left hand gained no real power as he jumped in weight, it was always hard.

his right hand did and thatâs because his technique improved with it under roach.

Pacquiao wasnât one hit koing full blown Welters, he was beating them to the punch and hitting them constantly flush because of his awkward Rythm. If you want to bring up Hatton, well just remember who else knocked out ******* Hatton.

- - l'l floydy needed sycophant Joe Cortez riding Ricky the whole of the fight to KO Ricky late.

Fact!!!

Manny gained weight and power to knock out bigger opponents. Has a better record vs Marquez than l'l floydy who shamed himself for this fight.

[Bundana]

wonâÃÂÃÂt respond to this as it is clear this is nearly impossible to actually prove. See my above points as to why I believe so.

such a foolish response Bundana, you break anything down far enough and it becomes impossible to prove

once again you see the small picture, you see it well - but the big picture; you donât see it at all!

Remember this thread?:

A key point that proves oldschool fighters were tougher and better chinned - Boxing Forum (boxingscene.com)

The key word here is of course "proves"... so right from the start, you open with something that obviously can't be proved! And from there you go on, over many pages, with outrageous claims, such as:

Most new boxers have glass jaws.
Boxers today are cowards, who give up too soon.
Modern boxers have only 2 good rounds in them, and are gassed after 4.
Pad-work ruins the punching pover of today's fighters.
Modern boxers lack the oldtimer knowhow to set an opponent up for the finish.
Comparing the greatest hearts of 2015 to 1940, well once again, the old timers win.
And what was it you said just a few days ago?... All the great trainers are gone - hence all the good fighters are gone.

You say, that while these opinions may not be provable by statistical numbers, they stem from your personal observarions over many years as a fan. Isn't it strange, that everything you have observed, has to do with how lousy today's boxers are? There seems to be nothing good, that can be said of modern boxers/boxing. Even when someone said, he thought there was an extraordinary amount of heart and guts on display in the Marquez vs Vazquez fights - you wouldn't hear of it! Put these guys back in the 1940s, and they would be nothing special, was your answer.

Do you really not realize, how incredibly biased you are?

[them_apples]

Punching power is driven more by the tendons and ligaments than the bulk of the muscle. This is why lanky fighters such as Hearns and Arguello had impressive power for their thin frames.

Agree. a strong skinny person can hit very very hard if catching opponents on the end of their punches. once they lock that arm out, everything is going through the opponent, not them.

Hearns
Arguello
Wilder
Saddler

to name a few

the best version of someone body in regards to mechanics is their natural weight, leaned down, but every muscle conditioned and strong. The heart and lungs, internals were all fitted to your particular body and can supply blood to it more effectively. Adding extra muscle is much harder on the heart, and also adds no real benefit in boxing. the chin as well, would be more fitted to ones weight class.

I truly believe most boxers actually just lift weights to look good, but live in denial. I truly believe this, weight lifting is a bodybuilding thing, even in the 70's with Norton, he was hanging out in golds gym, pumping iron with body builders. its always been about looks. just nobody admits it. it serves almost no purpose at all in boxing, outside of maybe some core exercises one might use.

[them_apples]

Remember this thread?:

A key point that proves oldschool fighters were tougher and better chinned - Boxing Forum (boxingscene.com)

The key word here is of course "proves"... so right from the start, ​you open with something that obviously can't be proved! And from there you go on, over many pages, with outrageous claims, such as:

Most new boxers have glass jaws.
Boxers today are cowards, who give up too soon.
Modern boxers have only 2 good rounds in them, and are gassed after 4.
Pad-work ruins the punching pover of today's fighters.
Modern boxers lack the oldtimer knowhow to set an opponent up for the finish.
Comparing the greatest hearts of 2015 to 1940, well once again, the old timers win.
And what was it you said just a few days ago?... All the great trainers are gone - hence all the good fighters are gone.

You say, that while these opinions may not be provable by statistical numbers, they stem from your personal observarions over many years as a fan. Isn't it strange, that everything you have observed, has to do with how lousy today's boxers are? There seems to be nothing good, that can be said of modern boxers/boxing. Even when someone said, he thought there was an extraordinary amount of heart and guts on display in the Marquez vs Vazquez fights - you wouldn't hear of it! Put these guys back in the 1940s, and they would be nothing special, was your answer.

Do you really not realize, how incredibly biased you are?


​

why can't you just have a normal debate????? I literally don't care, just give me reasons as to why you disagree. I'm tired of this irritability you have towards someone making claims. refute my claims then. You are coming across as someone really far on the spectrum, and I don't mean this in an insulting way, I mean it in I noticed this. Your fixation on things that are mostly just grammar is getting tiring. You are still a good poster, but please just stick to making good posts lol.

My posting style is all about making "claims" and spouting my opinion. Don't exhaust yourself for no reason, you can debate normally with me I am sure of it.

[QueensburyRules]

Agree. a strong skinny person can hit very very hard if catching opponents on the end of their punches. once they lock that arm out, everything is going through the opponent, not them.

Hearns
Arguello
Wilder
Saddler

to name a few

the best version of someone body in regards to mechanics is their natural weight, leaned down, but every muscle conditioned and strong. The heart and lungs, internals were all fitted to your particular body and can supply blood to it more effectively. Adding extra muscle is much harder on the heart, and also adds no real benefit in boxing. the chin as well, would be more fitted to ones weight class.

I truly believe most boxers actually just lift weights to look good, but live in denial. I truly believe this, weight lifting is a bodybuilding thing, even in the 70's with Norton, he was hanging out in golds gym, pumping iron with body builders. its always been about looks. just nobody admits it. it serves almost no purpose at all in boxing, outside of maybe some core exercises one might use.

- - Helped Norton win 3 of 3 vs Ali as far as the people were concerned, breaking his jaw the first fight.

Need to find a better topic suited to your strengths and not your weaknesses.

[Bundana]

why can't you just have a normal debate????? I literally don't care, just give me reasons as to why you disagree. I'm tired of this irritability you have towards someone making claims. refute my claims then. You are coming across as someone really far on the spectrum, and I don't mean this in an insulting way, I mean it in I noticed this. Your fixation on things that are mostly just grammar is getting tiring. You are still a good poster, but please just stick to making good posts lol.

My posting style is all about making "claims" and spouting my opinion. Don't exhaust yourself for no reason, you can debate normally with me I am sure of it.

Ok, let's try to have a normal debate!

If I came on here, and claimed today's boxers are braver with stronger chins than the oldtimers - how would you react to that? Would you just take my word for it? Would it be enough for you if I said, that this is how I feel, after many years of studying boxing history? I don't think it would - I'm sure you would want some kind of evidence for such a strange claim.

I believe everybody knows by now, that you're here for one thing, and one thing only - to denigrate and belittle modern boxers! I have no idea, why this is your goal, or why you're willing to say the most outrageous things, to "prove" your point. You have of course every right to believe whatever fits your agenda - just as I have every right to question those beliefs.

And, by the way, it's not up to me to refute your claims - it's up to you, to provide some kind of evidence to back them up. Simply because you think so, is not good enough!

And I'm the one who comes across as a weirdo, because I question your strange opinions? Jesus...

[them_apples]

Norton beat Ali the worst at a lighter weight. at 205 Norton was a good fighter.

[them_apples]

Ok, let's try to have a normal debate!

If I came on here, and claimed today's boxers are braver with stronger chins than the oldtimers - how would you react to that? Would you just take my word for it? Would it be enough for you if I said, that this is how I feel, after many years of studying boxing history? I don't think it would - I'm sure you would want some kind of evidence for such a strange claim.

I believe everybody knows by now, that you're here for one thing, and one thing only - to denigrate and belittle modern boxers! I have no idea, why this is your goal, or why you're willing to say the most outrageous things, to "prove" your point. You have of course every right to believe whatever fits your agenda - just as I have every right to question those beliefs.

And, by the way, it's not up to me to refute your claims - it's up to you, to provide some kind of evidence to back them up. Simply because you think so, is not good enough!

And I'm the one who comes across as a weirdo, because I question your strange opinions? Jesus...

I GIVE YOU REASONS ALL THE TIME

FOR EXAMPLE

LISTING FIGHTERS WHO PERFORMED BETTER AT HEAVYWEIGHT BEING LIGHTER IS ONE REASON. THIS IS 1 FACT. IF YOU NEED FACTS.

why must you be so difficult to debate with?

and its clear my opinions stem from that absolute absurd opinion that modern boxers have automatically improved with "modern conditioning". many people hold this baseless opinion.

I constantly post videos showing old fighters performing skills we don't see anymore (and point them out), upscaled hq footage allowing us to see how they fought. Yet you act like I never give a shred of evidence? regarding this obscure topic I give about as much evidence as someone ever could.

[Bundana]

I GIVE YOU REASONS ALL THE TIME

FOR EXAMPLE

LISTING FIGHTERS WHO PERFORMED BETTER AT HEAVYWEIGHT BEING LIGHTER IS ONE REASON. THIS IS 1 FACT. IF YOU NEED FACTS.

why must you be so difficult to debate with?

and its clear my opinions stem from that absolute absurd opinion that modern boxers have automatically improved with "modern conditioning". many people hold this baseless opinion.

I constantly post videos showing old fighters performing skills we don't see anymore (and point them out), upscaled hq footage allowing us to see how they fought. Yet you act like I never give a shred of evidence? regarding this obscure topic I give about as much evidence as someone ever could.

I'm not talking about lighter HWs performing better, or videos showing oldtimer skills. I'm talking about specific claims like, for example: Most new boxers have glass jaws! I haven't seen you come up with any kind of evidende for this. Or for any of the other specific claims I listed.

As for modern boxers having automatically improved with "modern conditioning" being an absurd opinion... yes, I absolutely agree with that! I can think of no evidence, that backs up such an opinion. So I'm not arguing for moderns being better - I'm arguing against them beeing complete dog****, which of course is what you like to think.