Cory Sandhagen is likely not a size bully, stop pretending otherwise

Tell me more about elephants and giraffes.
Elephants are very social and can be extremely empathic.
Due to the square cube law, Elephants (and Giraffes too) - like all larger animals - are unbelievably weak for their body weight.
This is because muscle strength is hugely, if not solely dependant on the cross sectional area of muscles, whereas weight depends on the volume.
However, since the cross sectional area is two-dimensional and volume is three-dimensional, "scaling" an animal "up" while keeping the same proportions leads to the increase in strength being slower (²) in comparison to the increase in weight (³).
Since both are mammals and thus warm-blooded, they - like we humans do - have a) rounder proportions when they are born, since the closer to a ball we get shape-wise, the less heat we lose, because after all, a ball is the geometric shape which has th least surface area compared to its volume amongst all geometrical bodies and b) they are born far bigger relative to their adult size than reptiles, since even the round proportions would not make up for the tremendous heat loss caused by the increasingly big surface area relative to their body weight.
It is also due to this law, that animals don't get larger beyond a certain point, since the stability of bodies (thus also bones) is also determined by their cross sectional area.
Due to this reason
  • Elk - despite having disproportionally thicker bones, have a higher risk of bone fracture than deer.
  • Giraffes and Elephants can't survive a fall from higher than a house cat
Cheers!
 
Elephants are very social and can be extremely empathic.
Due to the square cube law, Elephants (and Giraffes too) - like all larger animals - are unbelievably weak for their body weight.
This is because muscle strength is hugely, if not solely dependant on the cross sectional area of muscles, whereas weight depends on the volume.
However, since the cross sectional area is two-dimensional and volume is three-dimensional, "scaling" an animal "up" while keeping the same proportions leads to the increase in strength being slower (²) in comparison to the increase in weight (³).
Since both are mammals and thus warm-blooded, they - like we humans do - have a) rounder proportions when they are born, since the closer to a ball we get shape-wise, the less heat we lose, because after all, a ball is the geometric shape which has th least surface area compared to its volume amongst all geometrical bodies and b) they are born far bigger relative to their adult size than reptiles, since even the round proportions would not make up for the tremendous heat loss caused by the increasingly big surface area relative to their body weight.
It is also due to this law, that animals don't get larger beyond a certain point, since the stability of bodies (thus also bones) is also determined by their cross sectional area.
Due to this reason
  • Elk - despite having disproportionally thicker bones, have a higher risk of bone fracture than deer.
  • Giraffes and Elephants can't survive a fall from higher than a house cat
Cheers!
I meant personally, but that's nice I guess.
 
I repeat he is 6 foot tall at 135. He is ducking his natural weight class.. play your semantics for all I care.

I repeat, height isn't weight, they don't have height classes in MMA, they have weight classes. Sandhagen is tall for FW, but most of his opponents weight more than him, deal with it.
 
I meant personally, but that's nice I guess.
300px-Surprised_Shaq.jpg
 
The problem with these fighters who use their natural metabolism advantages to get into divisions where they have tremendous reach advantages isn't a philosophical one, like I don't care about the ethics of it. It just becomes a practical one because, as every person ages, their metabolism slows down and their bone structure changes, you may undergo health problems and injuries, etc. So a weight cut that is doable at 25 is much harder at 35. So that fighter is on a timer to win in that division before they have to move up to the next division. But between O'Malley and Sandhagen for example, I think Sandhagen has a lower metabolism and makes the weight easier. So he still has quite a bit more time at 135. But for example, if you look at Figuereido at FW, not to take away from Moreno who I personally was rooting for, but Figgy could make the weight, and he could make the weight, and he could make the weight, until one day he couldn't, and he got choked out and lost his belt. For some it's worth it, particularly like in Figgy's case he already won the belt and held it for a while, earned some money, a harsh cut and the health problems that come with that are fine, he can pay the hospital bills. Other fighters never get there, so it is a reasonable calculation each fighter has to make, if they can sustainably make that weight as they age.
 
he has the frame of max holloway, who should be fighting at lw, but fights at bw. he is the definition of a weight bully
This. What is his weight on fight night is what I want to know. Dude looks like at least a lightweight
 
This. What is his weight on fight night is what I want to know. Dude looks like at least a lightweight

Csac released his in cage weight. It was 149lbs, and lighter than nearly all other bantamweights whose weight was released.
 
He's still figuring it out. He'll be a champ in 2-3 years. Not everyone becomes a young phenom
 
he has the frame of max holloway, who should be fighting at lw, but fights at bw. he is the definition of a weight bully
No he doesn't.

Hey @Ironnik94 good thread. Its a shame you pointed out idiots who think height is the same thing as size or frame and one of the first responses is such an idiot
 
He is a 5'11" guy fighting at 135 lbs. Not sure how he makes the weight (despite the lanky frame), but yeah he is a weight bully. At 155 lbs, he will get his clock cleaned.
He literally is smaller than most other bantamweights, including TJ, even if by a narrow margin.

Your claim is devoid of any substance.
 
Back
Top