Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's Your Reach?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    ^^^Yeah. That's armpit to knuckle right?

    The one that goes across your back isn't good. I remember Tyson being 5'11'' had a 5-6 inch "reach" over someone who was 6'3'', don't remember who though. He didn't have longer arms, just a wide back.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by NJFighter91
      ^^^Yeah. That's armpit to knuckle right?

      The one that goes across your back isn't good. I remember Tyson being 5'11'' had a 5-6 inch "reach" over someone who was 6'3'', don't remember who though. He didn't have longer arms, just a wide back.
      Yea exactly. The point of measuring reach is to find out who has longer arms. And have an idea of who would have the advantage when fighting outside.

      Comment


      • #13
        i thought it was armpit to knuckles because when you throw a punch your hand isnt open its closed into a fist

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Hatton Hitman
          i thought it was armpit to knuckles because when you throw a punch your hand isnt open its closed into a fist
          Yeah, that's what it is.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by NJFighter91
            Yeah, that's what it is.
            o right, thanks

            Comment


            • #16
              Just for the record, arms don't completely encompass reach. Think about it from an anatomical perspective. If my arm reach is the same as someone else's, but my back is 4 inches wider, I have 2 extra inches to lead with and I can still move my head. So it DOES factor in, just not much. I wasn't saying that one number sounds better or that one is more realistic, just giving the boxing definition of "Reach." You see "Tale of the Tape" before a fight and the reach is usually 60+ for everyone. I doubt highly that anyone has a 60" measurement from armpit to knuckles.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by NJFighter91
                ^^^Yeah. That's armpit to knuckle right?

                The one that goes across your back isn't good. I remember Tyson being 5'11'' had a 5-6 inch "reach" over someone who was 6'3'', don't remember who though. He didn't have longer arms, just a wide back.
                tysons reach was 72" so this 6'3 guy must have had a reach of 66-67 inches- the same as the 'short-armed' 5'10 marciano

                tysons back, bone structurewise was not big to be honest, this 6'3 guy must have looked freaky

                Comment


                • #18
                  mines 82" btw
                  my arm length is 33 i think i'll measure it again later

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    74" at 16, weighing 205 on a normal day, before running

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by hemichromis
                      tysons reach was 72" so this 6'3 guy must have had a reach of 66-67 inches- the same as the 'short-armed' 5'10 marciano

                      tysons back, bone structurewise was not big to be honest, this 6'3 guy must have looked freaky
                      Bone structure, he looked pretty normal. But muscle wise, his back was sick.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP