Does anyone still think the old time heavyweights were too small to be competitive in the modern era?

[Mr Mitts]

Why not measure energy and not assume how the energy is used to cause the KO.

It is perfectly acceptable to claim X gets his KOs from forceful punching, Y from power punching, and Z seems to come out of no where with no real tell for either.

Foreman seems kinda pushy, imo.

Tyson doesn't, Tyson's pretty snappy.

I don't think anyone should be shocked to find George had more force in his punches and Tyson had more power but both have plenty of physics to explain how they dropped folks.


With your car stuff, bro we fixing to get into kinematic chains! I love that ****, if you want to I'm down. I don't have an argument perse, much like the above it's more like submitting for consideration.

I can just say that is a hella good post.

Energy, Force and Power are so interrelated that really we could use anyone of them for our purposes with a little algebra. They all come together, can't have one without the other.

I would love to have a thread about the kinetic chain, especially since I don't know much about it. Go ahead, sir, by all means start such a thread. I consider you and Bill the masters of that around here. There may be others, my apologies to them.

The only other thing I wanted to mention is that the car experiment could be done entirely differently. No brick wall this time. They cross the finish line at exactly the same instant at 100 mph, one has been accelerating in order to catch up at the last instant, the other has maintained a steady speed on the few feet. Does one car take longer to stop if power is cut exactly at the finish line? Does it take more energy to stop it?

I would like to say they are the same, but I have learned intuition can really lead one astray in math. Some gamblers at dice came to Galileo. They did not understand why their own calculations (which they considered logical) were so amiss that they differed from the reality of their experience. Galileo had to explain to them that there are two ways to roll a 7 with a 6 and 1 because the order of the dice could be different. Imagine dice of two different colors. You could roll a 6 with the red die and 1 with the blue. Or it could happen the other way around. The gamblers had not reasoned that part out. They thought there was only one way.

Was Galileo a genius? That was small potatoes for him. That son a of gun figured out the principles of gravity by rolling cannonballs down a ramp. If it gets smarter than that I don't know about it. Like Ali, he was forced out of his occupation in his scientific prime. He would have given us a hella lot more if left alone.

[Willie Pep 229]

I can just say that is a hella good post.

Energy, Force and Power are so interrelated that really we could use anyone of them for our purposes with a little algebra. They all come together, can't have one without the other.

I would love to have a thread about the kinetic chain, especially since I don't know much about it. Go ahead, sir, by all means start such a thread. I consider you and Bill the masters of that around here. There may be others, my apologies to them.

The only other thing I wanted to mention is that the car experiment could be done entirely differently. No brick wall this time. They cross the finish line at exactly the same instant at 100 mph, one has been accelerating in order to catch up at the last instant, the other has maintained a steady speed on the few feet. Does one car take longer to stop if power is cut exactly at the finish line? Does it take more energy to stop it?

I would like to say they are the same, but I have learned intuition can really lead one astray in math. Some gamblers at dice came to Galileo. They did not understand why their own calculations (which they considered logical) were so amiss that they differed from the reality of their experience. Galileo had to explain to them that there are two ways to roll a 7 with a 6 and 1 because the order of the dice could be different. Imagine dice of two different colors. You could roll a 6 with the red die and 1 with the blue. Or it could happen the other way around. The gamblers had not reasoned that part out. They thought there was only one way.

Was Galileo a genius? That was small potatoes for him. That son a of gun figured out the principles of gravity by rolling cannonballs down a ramp. If it gets smarter than that I don't know about it. Like Ali, he was forced out of his occupation in his scientific prime. He would have given us a hella lot more if left alone.

Is that very last part true?

I have heard that the Church put him under house arrest and that he continued his research, but of course was not allowed to publish.

After death the Church then took possession of his work and released it at their liesure.

But I am not certain of this. I am certain he was not punished (the rack) but he was controlled.

P.S. The cars would use the same amount of energy to stop.

Correct?

[Roberto Vasquez]

Didn’t Steve Cunningham knock Tyson Fury on his ass?

Yes he did. This is common knowledge. But that McDermot guy and David Price actually beat Tyson Fury. No one is saying they were great HW's. You need consistent results to be a good HW. Cunnigham beat a few lower down guys an then lost and ended up back down at CW

[Willie Pep 229]

Yes he did. This is common knowledge. But that McDermot guy and David Price actually beat Tyson Fury. No one is saying they were great HW's. You need consistent results to be a good HW. Cunnigham beat a few lower down guys an then lost and ended up back down at CW

I understand your argument.

But I do take issue with the boldface above.

It is impossible (IMO) to be constantly great in the fight game.

Louis-Conn
Ali-Norton
Dempsey-Gibbons
Tyson-Smith
Halger-Duran
Marciano-Charles I
Liston-Macon
Louis-Walcott I


All these were wins, but had bad performance nights.

There are many more.

They all have bad nights now and again.

I think it is unfair to diminish greatest because of a bad night here or there.

[Anomalocaris]

I understand your argument.

But I do take issue with the boldface above.

It is impossible (IMO) to be constantly great in the fight game.

Louis-Conn
Ali-Norton
Dempsey-Gibbons
Tyson-Smith
Halger-Duran
Marciano-Charles I
Liston-Macon
Louis-Walcott I


All these were wins, but had bad performance nights.

There are many more.

They all have bad nights now and again.

I think it is unfair to diminish greatest because of a bad night here or there.

Ali -Jones was another.

[Mr Mitts]

Is that very last part true?

I have heard that the Church put him under house arrest and that he continued his research, but of course was not allowed to publish.

After death the Church then took possession of his work and released it at their liesure.

But I am not certain of this. I am certain he was not punished (the rack) but he was controlled.

P.S. The cars would use the same amount of energy to stop.

Correct?

The cars, yes the same energy. My analogy was not very good

I am not certain either. I don't know how Galileo spent his days in his house. No one could stop him from thinking. I doubt he would chance writing down any more of his heresy though. He probably worked on other ideas. It is a good question did the church allow him to write down his heresy. If they did allow it they probably wanted to read it themselves but did not want it to be generally known. Priests were among the most educated people of the time and were perhaps enamored of his work privately.

Any chance you can dig up just what he was allowed to research and write down?

[Anomalocaris]

Is that very last part true?

I have heard that the Church put him under house arrest and that he continued his research, but of course was not allowed to publish.

After death the Church then took possession of his work and released it at their liesure.

But I am not certain of this. I am certain he was not punished (the rack) but he was controlled.

P.S. The cars would use the same amount of energy to stop.

Correct?

He got off very lightly.

Just look at what happened to poor Giordano Bruno.

[Asmodeus]

louis was 6'2" with a 76" reach, and the most technically gifted heavyweight we've ever seen. He also dispatched fighters the size of fighters today with relative ease.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Asmodeus]

I understand your argument.

But I do take issue with the boldface above.

It is impossible (IMO) to be constantly great in the fight game.

Louis-Conn
Ali-Norton
Dempsey-Gibbons
Tyson-Smith
Halger-Duran
Marciano-Charles I
Liston-Macon
Louis-Walcott I


All these were wins, but had bad performance nights.

There are many more.

They all have bad nights now and again.

I think it is unfair to diminish greatest because of a bad night here or there.

no. hagler lost and lost badly.

and ali NEVER beat norton even once

also your argument is pathetic and self serving.

[Bronson66]

no. hagler lost and lost badly.

and ali NEVER beat norton even once

also your argument is pathetic and self serving.

I don't think you are going to be with us too long.