Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GGGarglers whining about jacobs size yet made 0 excuses 4 Money vs bigger foes

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by therealpugilist View Post
    Cry me a river...a coward can fight guys from 130-154 and a monster is too small ..154-168 doe lol they. Can get it
    yes mayweahter grew out of his division, when he moved up in almost every case... didn't he fail to make weight vs. marquez? that's right he did.

    GGG has yet to fail to make weight

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by Jsmooth9876 View Post
      Yeah and height and reach can't be any kind of advantage
      How did that work out for Michael Spinks against Tyson? Or Bob Foster against Joe Frazier? Because of course by your stupid logic Spinks and Foster were bigger than Tyson and Frazier.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
        How did that work out for Michael Spinks against Tyson?


        https://youtu.be/T02RhdpGWgw
        Just fine, I'm sure he made millions. Unfortunately he **** his pants on the way to the ring in fear. When guys weigh close to the same height and reach certainly can play a factor in a fight. Some guys in here making Paul Williams to mike Tyson references, yeah 50 lbs would do the trick along with face crushing power for Tyson. Apples and oranges.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Irony123 View Post
          yeah but mike tyson wouldn't be able to make WW or light weight whatever Diego Corrales made. Floyd generally fought in a division where he could make the weight and not more than 1 division above that, that's why your comparison is irrelevant, when both fighters make the weight then reach and height come into effect, some can argue that being shorter and stockier is an advantage and that maybe true but every boxer I've ever talked to said otherwise.
          That's exactly the point. Height and reach alone doesn't make a fighter "bigger." I'm glad you finally get it.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
            There are no height and reach divisions, dumbass.With your asinine logic Diego Corrales would have had a size advantage over Mike Tyson.
            Yeah, but it all coalesces. Overall a guy with a longer reach/height will more often than not be at an advantage. I'm not saying weight doesn't matter, just that height and reach also factor in as a size advantage imo.

            I don't consider someone who has a few pounds on someone else the bigger man. The OP also claims Hatton was naturally bigger than Floyd which is just silly.

            Kovalev and Ward were probably nearly the same weight on fight night but I still consider Kovalev the bigger man, just like Floyd was bigger than Pacquiao.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Jsmooth9876 View Post
              Just fine, I'm sure he made millions. Unfortunately he **** his pants on the way to the ring in fear. When guys weigh close to the same height and reach certainly can play a factor in a fight. Some guys in here making Paul Williams to mike Tyson references, yeah 50 lbs would do the trick along with face crushing power for Tyson. Apples and oranges.
              Comparing height and reach differences to weight​ is Apples and Oranges. Who would have the bigger advantage? Thomas Hearns height and reach or Tyson's weight? Using reach and height as an example of being "bigger" is just stupid. Especially when the opponent outweighs the taller fighter with more reach.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by JoeMan View Post
                Floyd never do second-day weigh in, so you're lying.





                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
                  Comparing height and reach differences to weight​i s Apples and Oranges. Who would have the bigger advantage? Thomas Hearns height and reach or Tyson's weight? Using reach and height as an example of being "bigger" is just stupid. Especially when the opponent outweighs the taller fighter with more reach.
                  Tyson was an anomaly though, a genetic freak in terms of physique. Overall, a 5-7 pound weight advantage would be offset by a 3 inch height/reach advantage.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by joseph5620 View Post
                    Comparing height and reach differences to weight​ is Apples and Oranges. Who would have the bigger advantage? Thomas Hearns height and reach or Tyson's weight? Using reach and height as an example of being "bigger" is just stupid. Especially when the opponent outweighs the taller fighter with more reach.
                    Height and reach can certainly be more of an advantage than weight though. They both can be just as much as an advantage in certain circumstances

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by Irony123 View Post
                      yes mayweahter grew out of his division, when he moved up in almost every case... didn't he fail to make weight vs. marquez? that's right he did.

                      GGG has yet to fail to make weight
                      Was he ever a full fledged 154 guy...nope.

                      Found a way to win 10+ pound weight disparity


                      You suck at this bro

                      Keep reaching

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP