A fighters "reach" measurement

pm · Post by pm » 01 Sep 2006, 09:39

might sound stupid but how is this measured?

i see tommy hearns reach is 78". obviously his arms aren't 6 and 1/2 feet long (debatable) so where does this measurement come from?

Chambers2 · Post by **Chambers2** » 01 Sep 2006, 09:45

As far as I'm aware it;s the measurement from tip of the fingers on your left hand to the tip of the fingers on your right hand, when your arms are held out to the side (T-shaped)

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Sep 2006, 10:16

Yes, reach could probably be more correctly described as wingspan, it is fingertip to fingertip when the arms are fully extended.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 01 Sep 2006, 15:01

I maintain to this day the reason I wasn't great at boxing was cos of my little for arms, Carl Froch always looks to me to have massive armes although it may be because he holds his left low as is.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Sep 2006, 16:59

No Froch has VERY long arms, he reminds me of Cristano Espana or 'claws' as he was known.

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 01 Sep 2006, 17:38

Paul Williams reach is 82'' which is 1'' bigger than Wladimir Klitschko's!

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Sep 2006, 17:50

christ, that's freakishly long. Hearns' was only 78 and he was considered to have an exceptional reach for a Welterweight!

When you consider how broad shouldered Wlad is, that really is quite amazing! Wlad must have pretty short arms.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 01 Sep 2006, 17:53

jamesmcdonnell wrote:christ, that's freakishly long. Hearns' was only 78 and he was considered to have an exceptional reach for a Welterweight!

When you consider how broad shouldered Wlad is, that really is quite amazing! Wlad must have pretty short arms.

Marvin Haglers was 76" at 5'9"

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 01 Sep 2006, 19:51

i am pretty sure the reach's for both Klits are regularly wrong....
i am sure they are both 84 plus

Rocky had mega short arms.... comical

WayoftheCass · Post by **WayoftheCass** » 01 Sep 2006, 23:20

I remeber when Mosley fought ODLH , Sahne was about 3 inches shorter than Oscar but his reach was 4'' longer which was weird. I think it gave De La Hoya big probs as he seemed to fall short a lot with his own punches.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 02 Sep 2006, 03:44

knockout wrote:i am pretty sure the reach's for both Klits are regularly wrong....
i am sure they are both 84 plus

Rocky had mega short arms.... comical

Why would they be wrong, it's a pretty easy thing to measure. You will rarely find a european caucasian fighter with very long arms, long limbs are a genetic trait that are predominant in peoples from Africa, apparently it's something to do with the fact that long limbs radiate more heat and are better for regulating temperature in very hot climates.

Short barrel chested peoples with short stocky limbs, are suited to cold climates as their bodies give off less heat in very cold conditions.

Wonder what Valuev's reach is?

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 02 Sep 2006, 07:19

Black guys have longer limbs on average. Didn't Rocky Marciano have a 67inch reach or something around that? Part of the reason Mayweathers done so well is his 72inch reach - Corrales in contrast who looked much bigger had a 70inch reach

Williams could dominate based on his physical advantages. 82 inch reach and 100punches a round is unpredented at 147. HE will give Floyd/Margarito/Hatton and anyone upto 160 nightmares.

Guys like Williams are the reason PBF shouldnt have gone past 140 imo. DLH has a 73 inch reach and Mosley 74.

exmuslim · Post by **exmuslim** » 02 Sep 2006, 08:20

Valouev has 220 cm reach, Wlad 200 cm, Vitali 198 cm. Not sure what that is in inches.
Anybody knows how many cm to an inch, so we could transform these measurements to American system?

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
knockout wrote:i am pretty sure the reach's for both Klits are regularly wrong....
i am sure they are both 84 plus

Rocky had mega short arms.... comical
Why would they be wrong, it's a pretty easy thing to measure. You will rarely find a european caucasian fighter with very long arms, long limbs are a genetic trait that are predominant in peoples from Africa, apparently it's something to do with the fact that long limbs radiate more heat and are better for regulating temperature in very hot climates.

Short barrel chested peoples with short stocky limbs, are suited to cold climates as their bodies give off less heat in very cold conditions.

Wonder what Valuev's reach is?

bradinho · Post by **bradinho** » 02 Sep 2006, 08:50

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
knockout wrote:i am pretty sure the reach's for both Klits are regularly wrong....
i am sure they are both 84 plus

Rocky had mega short arms.... comical
Why would they be wrong, it's a pretty easy thing to measure. You will rarely find a european caucasian fighter with very long arms, long limbs are a genetic trait that are predominant in peoples from Africa, apparently it's something to do with the fact that long limbs radiate more heat and are better for regulating temperature in very hot climates.

Short barrel chested peoples with short stocky limbs, are suited to cold climates as their bodies give off less heat in very cold conditions.

Wonder what Valuev's reach is?

Its all about surface area to volume ratio - long skinny limbs lose heat faster ie a camel, stocky, stubby limbs keep lose heat a lot slower ie polar bear, its all about maintaining correct body temperature, BUT I am not so sure if it can be totally applied to modern man, since we have had reasonable intelligence for some time, ability to clothe ourselves, migrate long distances to more favourable conditions BUT i think there may be a little truth in it.

However, with a lot of mixing of cultures and races there are bound to be some anomalies.

bradinho · Post by **bradinho** » 02 Sep 2006, 08:52

Just measured my reach.

My height is 6' 1" and my reach is 6' 5" ...... is this quite long or not because i heard they are supposed to be quite equal. ???

exmuslim · Post by **exmuslim** » 02 Sep 2006, 08:55

Usually the wingspan is larger than the height.

bradinho · Post by **bradinho** » 02 Sep 2006, 09:06

Anyone else measured theres?

exmuslim · Post by **exmuslim** » 02 Sep 2006, 19:27

Height: 188 cm; wingspan: 203 cm. Dont have any idea what that is in the American measurement system.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 02 Sep 2006, 19:32

exmuslim wrote:Height: 188 cm; wingspan: 203 cm. Dont have any idea what that is in the American measurement system.

Divide by 2.5 and that will give you the imperial measurement.

Its about 6'3" and an 81" reach (6'9")

exmuslim · Post by **exmuslim** » 26 Sep 2006, 08:12

Thanks!

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 26 Sep 2006, 08:58

bradinho wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
knockout wrote:i am pretty sure the reach's for both Klits are regularly wrong....
i am sure they are both 84 plus

Rocky had mega short arms.... comical
Why would they be wrong, it's a pretty easy thing to measure. You will rarely find a european caucasian fighter with very long arms, long limbs are a genetic trait that are predominant in peoples from Africa, apparently it's something to do with the fact that long limbs radiate more heat and are better for regulating temperature in very hot climates.

Short barrel chested peoples with short stocky limbs, are suited to cold climates as their bodies give off less heat in very cold conditions.

Wonder what Valuev's reach is?
Its all about surface area to volume ratio - long skinny limbs lose heat faster ie a camel, stocky, stubby limbs keep lose heat a lot slower ie polar bear, its all about maintaining correct body temperature, BUT I am not so sure if it can be totally applied to modern man, since we have had reasonable intelligence for some time, ability to clothe ourselves, migrate long distances to more favourable conditions BUT i think there may be a little truth in it.

However, with a lot of mixing of cultures and races there are bound to be some anomalies.

There's more than a little truth to it, it's a fact, and a proven one. You have to remember that humans stopped evolving a very long time ago, when we began to adapt our environment to suit us, rather than having to adapt to our environment. Thus, people of black african descent, although having mixed genetics by and large, still have the genotype which makes them suitable to warm arid climates (presuming they are from the particular regions of africa which this suits) despite the fact their forebears left Africa many generations prior. There's hundreds of thousands of years of evolution have gone into producing

It's undeniable that there are racial differences, perhaps most evident in the success of black african american, and carribean males in the 100m sprint. there are simply a higher ratio of men from those regions of the world who have the right combination of limb length, rapid twitch muscle fibres and the slim hips and powerful upper body which is perfect for sprinting. I think anyone with a modicum of sense would recognise this now rather than argue about any social or economic factors.

It's notable also that it is the slim boned Africans (this is a genotype also) people from Kenya, Ethiopa, Sudan, Algeria etc and the similarly built peoples of Western Europe who have succeeded in middle distances, whilst the long distances are the preserve of groups around northern Africa, with Europeans not doing well at all.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 26 Sep 2006, 09:27

KO Artist wrote:
exmuslim wrote:Height: 188 cm; wingspan: 203 cm. Dont have any idea what that is in the American measurement system.
Divide by 2.5 and that will give you the imperial measurement.

Its about 6'3" and an 81" reach (6'9")

Sorry to be a pedant, but
So one meter = 39.4 inches = 3 1/4 feet

188 cm = 74 inches 6' 2" and 203 = 79.9 inches bloody long actually.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 26 Sep 2006, 09:31

james you are so ubiquitously vociferous.

emma · Post by **emma** » 26 Sep 2006, 09:59

Im 5ft 2inches with a 68" reach.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 26 Sep 2006, 10:21

so its an urban myth that if you measure from fingertip on one hand to fingertip on the other that is supposed to be exactly your hieght.
or thats how i remember it