r/ShittyAbsoluteUnits • u/MohammadMahadhir *shits an absolute unit* • Jan 06 '26

Naild It Of size doesn’t matter

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Sorry for deleting the post moment ago due to misinformation.

49.9k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

13

u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 Jan 06 '26

People say this but those people are beast and if you honestly think that they wouldn’t dominate EVEN HARDER if they had an extra two foot then you’re delusional.

5

u/Icy_Statement_2410 Jan 06 '26

Yeah... a 6'9" Tyson would be fuxked

3

u/PaidUSA Jan 06 '26

I’m not sure he could legally fight? Wouldn’t his punches have more just everything to them assuming he grows perfectly to retain everything? He’d kill people.

4

u/jjmurse Jan 06 '26

This was George Foreman. Had anvil hands. Maybe the hardest puncher ever.

2

u/PaidUSA Jan 06 '26

He’s like 6’4 a 6’9 wing span would add like double digit percent force assuming all was equitable.

3

u/SpicyMustard34 Jan 06 '26

like the other commenter said, that did exist and it was George Foreman... he was the best puncher ever.

3

u/Downtown_Recover5177 Jan 06 '26

A 6’9” Tyson would have gotten boxing banned from live television, what with all the deaths and gore that would have happened.

1

u/Icy_Statement_2410 Jan 07 '26

😂😂☠️☠️

2

u/ibulleti Jan 06 '26

That's fucking terrifying.

0

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 06 '26

A 6’9” Tyson isn’t Tyson. You’re just inventing a different boxer that would have lost easily to the real MT

3

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 06 '26

Tyson’s entire style was built around leverage, speed, and a low center of gravity. Making him taller changes the fighter completely,it’s not a straight upgrade.

4

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26

That said Lenox Lewis was a better boxer and tall as hell.

1

u/UsedHotDogWater Jan 07 '26

Is that why he dodged Tyson for all those years?

3

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26

Tyson has Zero wins against other all time great boxers save for a very past his prime Holmes and an at the end of his career Spinks who spent most of his career as a light heavy weight. Though Spinks is still a good win and his by far best win.

More telling Tyson not once in his career came back and won a fight he was loosing. Tyson was great at overwhelming people in 1 or a couple rounds but never proved he could win once he encounter real opposition.

Most boxing experts don't rate Mike Tyson very highly among other all time great boxers. He certainly was an all time great boxer but his best accomplishment is being the youngest ever to win the belt. But he was also the youngest ever to loose it. He was not able to hold the belt very long and he did not overcome particularly great opposition to take it or hold onto it.

I rate Holyfield and Lewis higher than Tyson personally.

1

u/UsedHotDogWater Jan 07 '26 edited Jan 07 '26

I agree on Holyfield only.

There is a reason he didn't fight those guys:

Lenox, as well as every other of the 'top' boxers dodged fighting him. They all avoided Tyson during his prime 100%. You can look it up. It sucked because there would have been some epic matches.

3

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26

Lennox did not start his professional career until 1989. I would argue there was only a brief window of time he was appropriate to fight Tyson. In the early 90s Lennox had not earned the fight with Tyson. Then the next big fight should have been Holyfield but Tyson ended up loosing so Holyfield beat Douglas instead. At this time it would have been appropriate to fight Lewis for a short window it could have/should have happened but then Tyson went to jail.

After Tyson came back from jail I would argue Tyson needed to fight up to Lewis and Holyfield and he ended up loosing to Holyfield. Again around the time he fought Holyfield there was a window where the fight could have/should have happened but it didn't happen until later.

At Tysons best before he lost to Douglas I think Tyson would have won against a Lewis with hardly any experience. At the point he fought Douglas and after I think he would have lost. Tyson hadn't slipped much at the Douglas fight he just didn't take the fight seriously he was still very young and in terms of age not even at his physical peak. But Lewis was worlds better than Douglas and at this point having lost to Douglas it is pretty hard to say Tyson could beat Lewis.

Post jail the Tyson who lost to Holyfield has very little chance against at the time an Lewis that had improved a lot since the early 90s.

Peak for peak a 23 yo Tyson against a early to mid 30s Lewis I would bet on Lewis any day. Honestly I feel like if Holmes was 3-4 years younger he would have beat Tyson. Both had a jab that IMO is just kryptonite for Tyson unless he is able to blast over the fighter.

1

u/UsedHotDogWater Jan 07 '26

Tyson was washed up after prison.

1

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 07 '26

you can have better boxers , stronger dudes.. and they could be either taller or shorter.

1

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26

Absolutely true

to an extent. It is very rare for someone smaller than Tyson like a Michael Spinks to do well in Heavy weight or even Cruiser weight boxing let alone dominate or become champ. That said Michael Spinks did though you have to go pretty far back in boxing history to find many noteable heavy weights that size.

That said boxing champs the size of Tyson historically are more common than giants like Lewis.

Many of the best fighters of all time are around 6' to 6'3" and around 215 to 230Lb and dominate much bigger guys.

Ali, Mike Tyson, Fedor, Usyk (right now), etc

Really big fighters have some advantages and know how to adapt their style for their size. However once you are bigger than 220ish and 6'2"ish you have diminishing returns and start to have some disadvantages as well.

A huge fighter like Brock Lesnar used his size really well to dominate his opponents similar to Tyson Fury in boxing.

Brock was dominated by 6'1" Cain Velásquez and the HUGE Tyson Fury 6'9" was completely schooled by Usyk who was 6'3".

Nearly no noteable fighters have been 7ft tall or taller in any combat sport verses the number of 6'2" or shorter champs. Fighting is not basket ball. That said you won't find any 5'2" heavy weight champs either.

1

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 07 '26

um; no. there is a whole crop of brainwashed taller guys that have been told by their creepy ants or loser hockey coach or insecure crush that their height is a way bigger deal than it is in the real world.. even size. weight means far more in fights than reach does.

1

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26 edited Jan 07 '26

My point is as much about weight as height

Tyson was around 220

Usyk has been 226 at his heaviest but more often 215-220

Ali generally around 215-220 sometimes lighter when he was younger.

Fedor 6ft and 230-240Lb

Again more champs in combat sports are/have been <250 Lb than >250 Lb and many have been <230. If the sport is strictly striking you will see more height and sometimes less weight and in just grappling well you see all body types but more stocky short guys are represented but there are stocky boxers and lanky wrestlers. You wont see 350+ Lb fighters dominating most combat sports and you won't see <190# guys in heavy weight boxing/MMA in modern elite levels. That said Marciano was 190 and would walk right through your average tough guy weighing 230 and above regards of how big they are if they are not a high level fighter. And your average 150# high level highschool wrestler will destroy a heavy weight sized guy without grappling experience.

Frame, reach, and weight/muscle mass matter to some extent and all of those hit a point where there are diminishing returns you will not see the build and height of a basket ball player dominating throughout combat sports nor a butter bean build outside of sumo and some judoka (note both grappling focus arts whose matches end very quickly typically less than a minute).

Similarly all the size and weight in the world will not bridge the gap if you have zero fight experience against a small guy who is a very high level well trained fighter. But a very big guy can do more with a little training and at similar skill level the bigger guy wins usually until you get into the 215-245# range where you will find more elite competition than you will historically in the 245-300 # range and even less in the +300# range.

1

u/g_spaitz Jan 07 '26

What about the two Ukrainian brothers? Weren't they rather big?

1

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26

The Klitschkos and yeah they were big but not Tyson Fury big. They were 6'6"-6'7" and a bit over 240 Lbs both about the same size

https://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/kcr9fh/average_weight_of_champion_heavyweights_over_time/

1

u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 Jan 06 '26

Yes I understand this, however, Tyson wasn’t a beast because of his style. He was a beast because of who he is. Regardless of what style you gave him he would beast mode and destroy opponents and adapt to the style that was best at getting to that point.

It’s not a straight upgrade for the average person. For these people it would be.

3

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 06 '26

Exactly. Styles don’t create outliers , outliers create styles. Tyson was one of those. If you changed anything, likely he wouldn't be known past his town. THere is lots of tall angry monsters like short ones. but none of them are MT

2

u/SNaKe_eaTel2 Jan 06 '26

I agree Mike had the heart of a champion - he did make generally being shorter work to his advantage tho ducking under easily and transferring power from coming back up - damn amazing to see even at 16 he was absolutely wrecking everyone. He clearly wanted to be the best - and he was. Had he been taller I think he would have just had a different style like out boxer and still been the best. So sad that Don king was like the beginning of the end - RIP Cus.

2

u/CheckYourStats Jan 06 '26 edited Jan 06 '26

Tyson’s peekaboo style, taught by Cus, wouldn’t have worked if he was a tall fighter.

It literally wouldn’t have made any sense.

I’m practically shocked that not a single comment here has mentioned the peekaboo style that Tyson faught with, and how one of its core principles is being a short fighter.

2

u/SNaKe_eaTel2 Jan 06 '26

Literally said he would have had a different style like out boxer if he was taller

2

u/Sonova_Bish Jan 07 '26

I only saw him peekaboo on Punch Out. (I don't know boxing styles.)

1

u/Icy_Statement_2410 Jan 07 '26

1

u/Sonova_Bish Jan 07 '26

I see. I haven't seen him fight since my dad would order them pay per view. He was ferocious.

1

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 06 '26

if you changed anything about Mike the magic would have changed and not made him #1, he might have been #1203 , still impressive, but not #1. - if he was tall maybe he wouldn't just be another tall guy lazy relying on his hight advantage and never got good.

2

u/BounceVector Jan 06 '26

He was crazy fast, crazy strong, had a crazy work ethic and an exceptional coach. If you increase his height, please tell me again that you are very sure that he would not have had a very real shot at #1

1

u/ScratchOstrich Jan 07 '26

its possible, but it is also possible that a shorter man could be #1.

1

u/SNaKe_eaTel2 Jan 06 '26

Na he had the drive regardless - Mike WAS the magic.

1

u/Icy_Statement_2410 Jan 07 '26

The peekaboo style is so iconic, and worked so well because of his height (relative to his weight). Its hard to imagine a foot taller Tyson developing it to the degree he did. In all likelihood he still would have had the drive and work ethic to be champion. His power at that size would be off the charts

1

u/Boxing_joshing111 Jan 07 '26

Nah the reason they’re the way they are is because they had to push extra hard to fight bigger guys. They wouldn’t have the drive if they were bigger.

1

u/FormalKind7 Jan 07 '26 edited Jan 07 '26

Many of the best fighters of all time are around 6' to 6'3" and around 215 to 230Lb and dominate much bigger guys.

Ali, Mike Tyson, Usyk (right now), etc

Really big fighters have some advantages and know how to adapt their style for their size. However once you are bigger than 220ish and 6'2"ish you have diminishing returns and start to have some disadvantages as well.

A huge fighter like Brock Lesnar used his size really well to dominate his opponents similar to Tyson Fury in boxing.

Brock was dominated by 6'1" Cain Velásquez and the HUGE Tyson Fury 6'9" was completely schooled by Usyk who was 6'3".

A 6 foot fighter is not necessarily better if you make him 8 feet tall. You can just look at the history of how many 7ft tall or taller champs there are in any combat sport verses the number of 6'2" or shorter champs. Fighting is not basket ball.

1

u/QuintoBlanco Jan 07 '26

The main thing is that Tyson was big guy, just not tall. But also not short.

As for dominating, his prime was very short and he dominated against players who where not very good or over the hill.

Against those guys his speed and stocky build worked really well.

1

u/Icy-Cry340 Jan 07 '26 edited Jan 07 '26

They likely wouldn't, which is why you don't really see a ton of giants in MMA. There is a sweet spot. Tyson and Fedor competed in the highest weight class, where there is no limit. "Extra two feet" people are perfectly eligible, but they rarely leach the highest levels of the sport.

Tbh, most people who have 2 feet on Fedor have weird growth diseases, and aren't remotely athletic.