Are the UFC stats for reach deceptive?

[chamcham]

It seems that reach is the entire length if you stretch out both arms and measure from the fingertip of one hand to the other hand.

But isn't that a bit deceptive.
What about people that are wider or narrower from shoulder to shoulder?

For example, 2 people can have a reach of 80 inches.
But one person has very broad, wide shoulders and thus, a shorter arm length.
The other person has very slim shoulders and thus, a longer arm length.

In this case, both people have the same "reach", but the guy with slim, narrow shoulders has longer arms and so would have the reach advantage when punching.

Wouldn't it be better to measure from shoulder to fingertip on both arms?
Isn't that what determines your reach when punching someone?

 

[SCTwins]

They should amputate the arm, measure it, and then re-fit the fighters with bionic arms. IMO

 

[AceCooch]

They should amputate the arm, measure it, and then re-fit the fighters with bionic arms. IMO

Their arms should be sanded down to smooth ends to ensure accuracy

 

[Drake]

Their arms should be sanded down to smooth ends to ensure accuracy

Eye pokes solved!! Jones is done...

 

[Rum]

It seems that reach is the entire length if you stretch out both arms and measure from the fingertip of one hand to the other hand.

But isn't that a bit deceptive.
What about people that are wider or narrower from shoulder to shoulder?

For example, 2 people can have a reach of 80 inches.
But one person has very broad, wide shoulders and thus, a shorter arm length.
The other person has very slim shoulders and thus, a longer arm length.

In this case, both people have the same "reach", but the guy with slim, narrow shoulders has longer arms and so would have the reach advantage when punching.

Wouldn't it be better to measure from shoulder to fingertip on both arms?
Isn't that what determines your reach when punching someone?

Reach is all about distance from a fighter's outstretched fist to his own head, not to his shoulder. The eternal question is "Can you hit the other guy in the head without him hitting you in the head?" So arm length is only part of the equation.

If fighters stood square on to throw then you'd be making more sense, but when a punch lands the fighter's body is basically side-on, so you ain't.

What have you been smoking? And can I have some?

 

[LongDongSilver]

orange belt .. don't even know how to tight it

 

[carrythezero]

I'm 5'9" with a 75 inch reach. Shoulders are not wide, just long ass arms. I remember some ppl on here said it wasn't possible for GSP to have a 76 inch reach at 5'10"...and his shoulders are much broader than mine.

 

[phys_therapy]

I personally find it more interesting to refer to 'reach' as 'wingspan'. It would also be more descriptive. 'Reach' could be different, based upon, for instance, a fighter's reach could be greater while cutting weight if attempting to reach for cookies vs., say, a fighter between training camps reaching for the mailbox. Whereas wingspan seems easier to visualize anatomically, like a Da Vinci drawing.

 

[chamcham]

I personally find it more interesting to refer to 'reach' as 'wingspan'. It would also be more descriptive. 'Reach' could be different, based upon, for instance, a fighter's reach could be greater while cutting weight if attempting to reach for cookies vs., say, a fighter between training camps reaching for the mailbox. Whereas wingspan seems easier to visualize anatomically, like a Da Vinci drawing.

Yes. I think what we refer to as "reach" should be called "wingspan".
And "arm length" should what is used for "reach".

Of course, there is a difference in height and some fighters are short and stocky with wide shoulders. So arm length isn't everything, but it should a better predictor of hitting someone's head than wingspan.

So instead of this (wingspan):

"reach" should be this (arm length):

However, I could see wingspan being useful if fighters started doing this: