Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Mayweather is about 6" too tall and 30lbs+ over what we are talking about here. But you haven't been interested in staying on topic over the years in this thread, so this isn't surprising.
Mayweather is a giant compared to a featherweight.
For posterity.
yep.
These are two different statements. Obviously Pacquiao never fit into the first category. Nowhere close in height, close in weight, but both outside. Pacquiao was one of many names thrown out there along with Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee - in response to a challenge by me to even find a person/fighter this small.. I bit on Pacquiao because he was at least close.
matuski > Pacquiao > Balance
This thread is/was awesome
It gets bettter and better over the years as Pacquiao is now a giant relative to that man quoted.
eta - and I get further and further from age 29.And yet you are still too scared to go to your local boxing gym.It gets bettter and better over the years as Pacquiao is now a giant relative to that man quoted.eta - and I get further and further from age 29.
Otis has a chance to get concussed within 60 seconds, yes.
In a pure boxing match, you get your ### kicked.In a no-holds brawl (I assume this means eye gouging, wrestling, anything goes), you would have a fighting chance based on out weighing the boxer by 100 pounds. However, if you're an out-of-shape slob in the second scenario, you'd probably still get your ### kicked.
He still has no chance.You people are ####### insane if you think that 100 pounds makes a difference when you are talking about world class athletes that take, and give beatings for a living. Your punches are not going to knock him out, even if you were lucky enough to connect. He would be wailing on your midsection and you would be puking blood in no time.
Granted I'm not as heavy as Balance/Matuski but at 6' 175 I think I could beat up a 75lb boxer in a streetfight.
umm no. You ever been hit by an 11 year old kid? I've got twin boys and every once in a while we will play box, punch each other in the arm, etc. Sometimes, they will come up with the sneak attack and hit me when I'm not expecting it, it does hurt (not that I let them know that). And they have never boxed or anything. Someone trained to punch and hit people for a living would kick my ### and I'm about 230 lbs currently and was a high school wrestler. All they have to do is bob/weave for about 2-3 minutes and when you are winded, kick your ####. 2-3 minutes doesn't sound like a long time, but in a combat/fight situation it is forever if you are not training/trained for it.
How about this 5'6" (I've stood next to him and would be surprised if he's that tall), 135-pounder?It gets bettter and better over the years as Pacquiao is now a giant relative to that man quoted.
Today, at 150 lbs, absolutely.At 125, different story.But nobody seems worried about sticking to the parameters, so go nuts.
Ceiling Pooper is proven.
I didn't use him as the example.. it was put to me as a seperate question, and it was 4 years ago when he was 25lbs lighter (but still way outside the height limit). Pacquiao never fit into the original weight and height limits.This is the fun of the thread.. people are no longer bothering to differentiate the claims.Talk about picking the wrong "littleman" to use as an example. This thread is gold.
Fun for you, because you think you are piling onto a claim that I could whoop Pacquiao, fun for me because I know you didn't read the thread.
This is my line of thought, and with Pacquiao you may be right... I stopped short of saying I could whoop him (way too tall for the absolute claim), "good odds" vs "odds aren't in favor" is our disagreement.
I am failing to see how 2 of your 3 claims have anything to do with anything here.
But thanks for the ~50th "I bet I could kick your ###" claim.
So is your position currently that a person smaller than Pacquiao but of equal skill would get his ### kicked by you?I didn't use him as the example.. it was put to me as a seperate question, and it was 4 years ago when he was 25lbs lighter (but still way outside the height limit). Pacquiao never fit into the original weight and height limits.This is the fun of the thread.. people are no longer bothering to differentiate the claims.Fun for you, because you think you are piling onto a claim that I could whoop Pacquiao, fun for me because I know you didn't read the thread.
It has never changed.. 5 ft. nothing, 115-125lbs.. no problem.I know it isn't as fun to keep it in perspective.. but this claim has never been about macho crap. The parameters make said person so tiny, that as far I can tell - noone has even seen someone this size outside of jockeys and 4th graders. I am actually still a little surprised by the reaction to what I consider a rather obvious statement. So yes.. you put the baddest ### 5ft nothing 115-125lb person on the planet in front of me, I'm still confortable with that claim.And to repeat, you might notice Pacquiao at his smallest was heavier by a bit, and taller by a lot. People were desperate to put a face to the claim, and this was the closest they could find.. off by 6".eta - this thread will get better and better with age (pun intended). I'm 34 now with 2 kids.. I foresee a quick slide into mediocre athleticism and belly fat.So is your position currently that a person smaller than Pacquiao but of equal skill would get his ### kicked by you?I didn't use him as the example.. it was put to me as a seperate question, and it was 4 years ago when he was 25lbs lighter (but still way outside the height limit). Pacquiao never fit into the original weight and height limits.This is the fun of the thread.. people are no longer bothering to differentiate the claims.Fun for you, because you think you are piling onto a claim that I could whoop Pacquiao, fun for me because I know you didn't read the thread.
But can you still dunk?It gets bettter and better over the years as Pacquiao is now a giant relative to that man quoted.
5'0 and 115 professional boxer or professional mma fighter is going to kick your ### up and down the ring. I'm still at a loss for how you think your weight/height advantage is going to be something you can leverage against a pro. You won't be able to lean on him if you box and you are not going to be physically stronger. I'm just shocked, in a good way, every time I come into this thread. It is pure gold.It has never changed.. 5 ft. nothing, 115-125lbs.. no problem.I know it isn't as fun to keep it in perspective.. but this claim has never been about macho crap. The parameters make said person so tiny, that as far I can tell - noone has even seen someone this size outside of jockeys and 4th graders. I am actually still a little surprised by the reaction to what I consider a rather obvious statement. So yes.. you put the baddest ### 5ft nothing 115-125lb person on the planet in front of me, I'm still confortable with that claim.And to repeat, you might notice Pacquiao at his smallest was heavier by a bit, and taller by a lot. People were desperate to put a face to the claim, and this was the closest they could find.. off by 6".eta - this thread will get better and better with age (pun intended). I'm 34 now with 2 kids.. I foresee a quick slide into mediocre athleticism and belly fat.So is your position currently that a person smaller than Pacquiao but of equal skill would get his ### kicked by you?I didn't use him as the example.. it was put to me as a seperate question, and it was 4 years ago when he was 25lbs lighter (but still way outside the height limit). Pacquiao never fit into the original weight and height limits.This is the fun of the thread.. people are no longer bothering to differentiate the claims.Talk about picking the wrong "littleman" to use as an example. This thread is gold.
I'm not going to get winded in 2-3 minutes, I trail run at least 1 10+ mile trip weekly in the summer. Not so much now that it's cold but I run stairs for an hour twice a week now that it's colder. I do work out with weights but only once per week so I'm confident my punching power isn't that special. I did just look it up though and 75 lbs is slightly smaller than your average 11 year old boy or girl.I'm not sure a 75lb person would really have much speed on me since I'm in good shape. And I doubt they would have much in the way of punching power.All that being said 175 v 75 is a much bigger advantage than 225 v 125.
Yep.But can you still dunk?It gets bettter and better over the years as Pacquiao is now a giant relative to that man quoted.
The awesome part about this is we can disagree. The idea that I wouldn't be physically stronger is baffling. I am equally shocked, in a good way, at how people repeatedly come in here and make the assumption that a guy the size of your average fourth grader would have the physical advantage. Skill - I get this.Smaller, shorter, less reach, less muscle = superhuman. I can't fight this logic.5'0 and 115 professional boxer or professional mma fighter is going to kick your ### up and down the ring. I'm still at a loss for how you think your weight/height advantage is going to be something you can leverage against a pro. You won't be able to lean on him if you box and you are not going to be physically stronger. I'm just shocked, in a good way, every time I come into this thread. It is pure gold.It has never changed.. 5 ft. nothing, 115-125lbs.. no problem.I know it isn't as fun to keep it in perspective.. but this claim has never been about macho crap. The parameters make said person so tiny, that as far I can tell - noone has even seen someone this size outside of jockeys and 4th graders. I am actually still a little surprised by the reaction to what I consider a rather obvious statement. So yes.. you put the baddest ### 5ft nothing 115-125lb person on the planet in front of me, I'm still confortable with that claim.And to repeat, you might notice Pacquiao at his smallest was heavier by a bit, and taller by a lot. People were desperate to put a face to the claim, and this was the closest they could find.. off by 6".eta - this thread will get better and better with age (pun intended). I'm 34 now with 2 kids.. I foresee a quick slide into mediocre athleticism and belly fat.So is your position currently that a person smaller than Pacquiao but of equal skill would get his ### kicked by you?I didn't use him as the example.. it was put to me as a seperate question, and it was 4 years ago when he was 25lbs lighter (but still way outside the height limit). Pacquiao never fit into the original weight and height limits.This is the fun of the thread.. people are no longer bothering to differentiate the claims.
Watching clips from the fight last night I was wondering "I wonder if that guy on the board still thinks he could beat a small fighter". Awesome.
6 pound weight difference at weigh-in. 5 inch height difference.I can see the obvious correlation to this thread.
I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I hope it's total fishing. He'd be smaller, shorter, less reach, and more powerful than you when it comes to a punch. And way more able to defend against a punch. Basically, way better in just about everything important to dominate a fight. That and he'd have some boxing skills. Which would be sort of important.JThe awesome part about this is we can disagree. The idea that I wouldn't be physically stronger is baffling. I am equally shocked, in a good way, at how people repeatedly come in here and make the assumption that a guy the size of your average fourth grader would have the physical advantage. Skill - I get this.Smaller, shorter, less reach, less muscle = superhuman. I can't fight this logic.
I bet this guy is small enough and quick enough to take Manny.
Even with fresh batteries and multiple big screens, he can still post here on Sunday afternoon. \/\/o\/\/
