Fight long reach vs. short reach?

Marvelous Marvin coped ok with hearns being longer, it's more in your mind than how long your fucking arms are.
the reach in that case was really not that significant, marvin had 75, hearns had 78. I remember speaking about it in the gym when i was a kid, there was a guy who did point out though, that hagler's reach included his huge torso and not his arms, but he had good reach, his jab in particular would surprise guys with it's length when they thought they were out of range.
 
most solutions in boxing are simple in principle, they might be hard to implement but they are simple in ideation. I remember I had a buddy who was sparring Maurice Smith, getting jabbed, complaining about it afterwards, I told him all he had to do was not parry but slip it, he was parrying it which would have been fine with someone his size but wouldn't work with someone that much taller. slipping also leaves your hands free to punch. A lot of it is mental really, but a reach disadvantage against someone good at using his reach is a true disadvantage. Just look at tyson when he lost a step, he knew all the tricks but didn't have the reflexes anymore. You have to use more energy to, you have to go to him, you have to take punishment on the way in, it really can be a disadvantage.
 
bump

I actually think Mayweather had a longer reach than Corrales. Corrales is known for having T Rex arms.
that was one performance as a mayweather hater that could really shut me up anytime.
 
Back
Top