Would tyson of been more or less effective if he were taller ? .

**juyjuy_returns** · 01-28-2006, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by catskills23

Would tyson of being more or less effective if he were taller than 5'11" 1\2 .

yeh he would have been. as his reach and overall power would have been much better

**JMCbulls** · 01-28-2006, 02:11 PM

less

his whole style was based on his size.
"when you have a small guy, make him fight smaller, lower to the ground, when you get a big guy, let him stand up straight" praphrased from angelo dundee.

**STEELHEAD** · 01-28-2006, 02:18 PM

not another ditsy tyson thread... man grow up childboy.you just get turned on to boxing.

**Verstyle** · 01-28-2006, 02:20 PM

better if he was shorter cause in a way he had an anvantage. cause the taller boxers would have to aim down alot of the times which in my opinion takes away power

**supaduck** · 01-28-2006, 02:23 PM

Damn, Tyson is an eternal source of discussion on this forum. My answer is, his height didn't really matter much until he fought guys over 6'4, then he was in a bit of trouble.

**Derranged** · 01-28-2006, 02:31 PM

Tyson is actually shorter than that.

**supaduck** · 01-28-2006, 04:15 PM

According to his pre fight weigh ins he was 5'11 1/2, he himself said he measured himself with a measuring tape and was 5'10, but he probably did it wrong, or he's shrank.

**buff_mike10** · 01-28-2006, 11:16 PM

He was the perfect size for his style. He could bob and weave under his opponents punches, and he used his 28" legs to aid in his upward punches. His shortness also helped him with his brutal body attacks. He never had a problem with tall figters until after he left Kevin Rooney. Tyson was text book size for a swarmer.

**Tarver is my dad** · 01-28-2006, 11:36 PM

i read somewhere that cus would make tyson run with weights in his back so he wouldnt grow any taller.

Would tyson of been more or less effective if he were taller ? .