Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by hasar, Jan 1, 2015.
He's 6' but has 80" reach.
How is that gif relevant?
I don't get it either.
"haha heres a gif from 5 years ago when both people involved were absolute noobs"
wow that gif is incredibly similar to silva's knockout
after a right punch from weidman, fighter goes to his right as opposed to his left and gets KOed by a left punch right on the chin
random thread gets random gifs
so here's uriah hall bro-hugging doomsday
And 5'9 Gastelum beat him but I guess Jones only wins because of his reach
Sonny Liston, 6'1 and an 84 inch reach.
It obviously helps greatly. Many fighters can't get remotely close to him. Gustafsson was the longest one, and he gave Jones fits. But he still didn't win. Jones prevails because of well-roundedness, fluid athleticism......and reach.
Hall's ineptitude at using his reach doesn't preclude it from being a major advantage for Jones. And the primary reason why Hall lost against Gastelum was wrestling. Thankfully for Jones he was a runner-up to Matt Riddle for the New York state championship....so he's a pretty good wrestler to keep fights on the feet and take them to the ground here or there as well.
Conor McGregor 5"9' with a 74 inch reach
Yeah his reach is pretty crazy for his height.
Sonny Liston had a crazy reach as well, He had an 84 inch reach but was "only" 6'1.
considering Jon Jones is 6'4" with an 84 inch reach, that's pretty impressive tbh
In his pants
Gus' height and reach had nothing to do with. His footwork and gameplan were spot on. A smaller fight could do what he did just fine.
Its a myth that reach is the only thing that matters, and people like yourself are dumb enough to believe it
Hall got lucky. He was about to get KO'ED by Costas. Hall vs Samman, make it happen greedy white.
I don't think most sane people say the ONLY reason Jones wins is because of his reach but I would also hope than people aren't dumb enough to think that reach doesn't factor into Jones success either.
In all seriousness, it's been found that Nilotic and sub-Saharan Africans have disproportionately elongated arms and legs relative to their height. It's thought that this is an adaptation to the extreme heat of the region. The long arms and legs, it is theorized, act as ultra-effective radiators, due to increased their increased surface area, allowing more heat to be shed and thus allowing greater athletic performance in these warmer climates. This translates into modern black Americans and basketball very well. It's not just that they're tall; their arms are far longer than Leonardo's idealized Vitruvian male whose wingspan is equal to his height. On average, your average NBA player is a black male with a reach 4-4.5 inches longer than his height. A guy like Dwight Howard may "only" stand 6'10, but his reach is 7'5. Think about that.
There's a book called The Sports Gene that lays out a couple chapters on this and a lot of other explosive-related material. Suffice it to say that black people tend to have extremely long limbs due to evolutionary forces imposed on them back in Africa and these long limbs are helping them cash in on a variety of sports today.
Please take your 8 posts and GTFO. Logic completely fails you.
Nobody... absolutely nobody said that. You are adding in superlatives that nobody used in an effort to justify your own ridiculous superlative. It doesn't work.
What people are saying is that it matters. It's a factor. Not that it's the ONLY thing that matters. Of course Jones and Gus are both very talented fighters, but if you think reach has "nothing to do with it" then you are one of the most dimwitted people I have ever been stupid enough to argue with.
Straight up knuckle dragger
Separate names with a comma.