Serious Question: What if the Klitschko's were 6'2'' & 220lbs??

[Cash Cow]

Having read the original post, and not the rest of the thread, I would have to say..... They wouldn't fight with the same style, if they were "shorter and smaller".

a 2-4 inch height difference wouldn't change someones style that much. Maybe Wlad would open up more. He just uses the jab because he can. He doesn't use it cause thats all he can do. He does whats easy.

if he was shorter, he'd have the same style but wouldn't just jab, he'd let the right go more. Thats not having a different style.

[goblin213]

how is it a guarantee they would fight different?

Maybe after consecutive losses they'd probably think of a different style of fighting.

[cupocity303]

my point exactly..how would that Vitali (without the size advantage) do vs the current HW division.

How did he know he would dilate to 6'7 when he was younger? Some people grow a lot some don't.

So I'm asking had he not had the size advantage would his skills still be the same. Im sure his height spurt didn't cause him to get smarter. Im sure mayweather would fight the same way if he was 5'10 or 5'11 instead of 5'8

If Tyson was 3 inches taller it wouldn't make a difference, he would still be the same person, same ferocity, same heart, same mind, same emotion, same athletic talent.

But it's a dumb question with disrespectful undertones, trying to get a dig at the Klitschko's.

Nobody denies that their style of fighting works because they're as tall as they are. But their height isn't all there is to them, which is what you're sneakingly trying to insinuate here. If it were so easy to be a Klitschko, why aren't other 6'7 guys in the past and present as dominant as they are?

Wlad Klitschko has fought multiple opponent with his height and taller. None of em have it in them to fight like a Klitschko. Why can't people just admit the that the Klitschko's are a rare breed, even at their height, and are special fighters of our time?

[cupocity303]

how is it a guarantee they would fight different?

Would Shaq O'neal be pushing his way to the basket, with his back turned, if he was 6'5? Would he be the dominant Center/scorer that he was.

Or with that hypothetical, would he no longer be Shaq at all, and basically a whole different player, either playing like a Kobe or someone below Kobe in talent/Athletic ability.

With that said, does it make Shaq anymore less talented, admitting that his size plays a big role in how dominant he was? It still isn't just his size, it was his skills. There were other guys his size, and weren't as good Centers in the NBA.

[UglyPug]

horrible, pointless thread. . . what if tyson were 6'5''? he wouldn't be nearly as effective because he mastered "inside fighting"; utilizing his short arms on the inside because he could turn his punches over first. . . same thing with holyfield

yes - the klitschko's height is used to the fullest in their fighting style. . . however, we have seen many, many, MANY tall fighters who are bums. . . you gotta master what god gave you. . . and the klitschko's have done that better than anybody. . .

that's all, thanks. . . bye noob!

[UglyPug]

threads like this are so useless. . . anybody who knows boxing, knows that being tall is just as much of a hinderance as an advantage. . . it's all about who can "master their height" the best. . .

[statosteve]

What if Floyd was 6"8 and 250Ilb????all it's Guna be is a what if???u will Neva no....

[Dunkeroo23]

What if Michael Jordan were only 5'6? What if Usain Bolt didn't have long legs? What if Michael Phelps didn't have long arms? What if Manny Pacquiao didn't have speed?

You are trying to imply that their success is based on their size, but isnt that the point? That all great athletes are blessed with physical advantages that the average person doesn't have. Every elite athlete in every sport has advantages, so its ****** to just take them away.

And your also assuming they would fight exactly the same and have exactly the same physical attributes, which is crazy. If Pacquaio were the size of the Klits, do you honestly think he would have the same speed he does now? Just like if the Klits were smaller, they would give up some size but they would certainly be faster, more agile, etc. So taking away their advantages yet saying "they would fight the same" is just biased

[CantBeTouched]

Theres a reason why flyweights fight different from heavyweights. Its because size affects your attributes. Apparently TS is an idiot and cant understand that

[WladIsTheChamp]

I am going to repeat what everyone else already said on this thread - TS you are an idiot and you are certainly no Klitschko fan, that was a loaded question which you obviously knew the answer to, basically you are insinuating that they only reason the Klitschkos are as good as they are is because of their size:

1) If they were smaller they would not fight the same and there is not telling how they would fight, and just you claim that Tyson would still "have the same heart, skills, and be the same person" is evidence of what a trolling Klitschko hater you are. If you give that much credit to Tyson and then claim to be a Klitschko fan, you should not have to question their heart in a back-handed way. At least have the balls to come out and be a Klitschko hater instead of pretending to be a fan.

2) The size is not what makes them great, it's their skill. Many 6'6" and 6'7" boxers could not achieve even a modicum of what they have achieved, in fact, most taller boxers suck and get beaten down by shorter more agile men; Chambers vs Dimitrenko, Ibragimov vs Briggs and Goofy, Chagaev vs Valuev, Barrett vs Fields, I can go on forever but you knew this already before you posted so my question to you is: Are you ****** or are you a troll? It can only be one of these choices.