BoxRec

palooka wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:So your example is a 38 year old Mohammed Ali who was probably already feeling the effects of parkinsons?

Hardly like for like Palooka. It's night and day.

You asked if 'it' had happened before in boxing and my reply was a little facetious; of course many boxers use dietery supplements, fat strippers and diuretics and cutting agents; some of them are sponsored by supplement manufacturers and have body builders as coaches. They look brilliantly healthy with not a gram of fat, sometimes it's down to hard work and a bit of help and sometimes down to a lot of help.

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote: You cant base someones overall conditioning on how good their physique looks!

I would say if a fighter looks clearly in better SHAPE than he has done in another fight, it is because he has been working to get in better condition.

Unless his training was based around looking cosmetically fit without being fit .

Joe calzaghe had amazing stamina and conditioning but in terms of aestetics he didnt look that great. Having a great looking body doesnt equal great conditioning.

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote: You cant base someones overall conditioning on how good their physique looks!

I would say if a fighter looks clearly in better SHAPE than he has done in another fight, it is because he has been working to get in better condition.

Unless his training was based around looking cosmetically fit without being fit .

Joe calzaghe had amazing stamina and conditioning but in terms of aestetics he didnt look that great. Having a great looking body doesnt equal great conditioning.

columbo wrote:
ok so you're admitting that a fighter with a poor physique can have good fitness but you wont entertain the thought that a boxer with a very good body can have poor fitness? ..... have you ever heard the term 'functional' fitness? if you look at a lot of the worlds elite body builders, they have amazing physiques but in terms of how much they can actually do with that body they're limited. Having decent muscle mass can actually hinder your fitness and lead to your muscles getting tired quicker as they require more oxygen and they're more prone to lactic acid build up.

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote:
ok so you're admitting that a fighter with a poor physique can have good fitness but you wont entertain the thought that a boxer with a very good body can have poor fitness? ..... have you ever heard the term 'functional' fitness? if you look at a lot of the worlds elite body builders, they have amazing physiques but in terms of how much they can actually do with that body they're limited. Having decent muscle mass can actually hinder your fitness and lead to your muscles getting tired quicker as they require more oxygen and they're more prone to lactic acid build up.

Admitting? What a strange choice of words.

Why would a bodybuilding physique work in boxing? What is the point in your example - we aren't talking bodybuilding (they don't need fitness do they? Boxers do).

I personally think you have just read up on the internet and posted the first legitimate looking thing you have seen, I don't think you have a clue in general (not just on this thread), you clearly don't think I do, let's leave it at

SNG wrote:I think stamina is a trait that can only be trained to a certain extent. There are some fighters like Calzaghe who don't look ripped and as fit as others yet they could go back to 15 rounders and do them as easily as they do 12, on the other hand there a fighters like David Haye who look in great shape but by the fifth round their blowing out of their arse if they have to fight at any like a pace.

columbo wrote: no I posted on what I know. It's also funny how when I give you a legitimate answer you come up with an insult. Always a good way to show you dont have a decent reply

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote: no I posted on what I know. It's also funny how when I give you a legitimate answer you come up with an insult. Always a good way to show you dont have a decent reply

Its not legitimate is it? It applies to bodybuilders who don't need fitness. Boxers do. Its ok though mate, you keep cracking on , wasn't an insult, I was just being 'honest'.

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote: no I posted on what I know. It's also funny how when I give you a legitimate answer you come up with an insult. Always a good way to show you dont have a decent reply

Its not legitimate is it? It applies to bodybuilders who don't need fitness. Boxers do. Its ok though mate, you keep cracking on , wasn't an insult, I was just being 'honest'.

so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote: no I posted on what I know. It's also funny how when I give you a legitimate answer you come up with an insult. Always a good way to show you dont have a decent reply

Its not legitimate is it? It applies to bodybuilders who don't need fitness. Boxers do. Its ok though mate, you keep cracking on , wasn't an insult, I was just being 'honest'.

so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

palooka wrote:My wife's got a certificate from Mensa but she knows nothing about boxing.

DMA1987 wrote:

palooka wrote:My wife's got a certificate from Mensa but she knows nothing about boxing.

I haven't got one and neither do I! (But I guess that's what you were getting at )

Interesting use on the ' ' around mensa, like it doesn't really exist.

palooka wrote:My wife's got a certificate from Mensa but she knows nothing about boxing.

columbo wrote:

palooka wrote:My wife's got a certificate from Mensa but she knows nothing about boxing.

That's nice for her Palooka. Il be sure to remember that ;;-)

palooka wrote:

columbo wrote:

palooka wrote:My wife's got a certificate from Mensa but she knows nothing about boxing.

That's nice for her Palooka. Il be sure to remember that ;;-)

It's nice for her lefty; it means she's right about everything because she's good at those silly puzzles.

Dead Mouse wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:
I have known bodybuilders who are less cardiovascularly fit than me. No doubt you are going to come up with a wrong, pedantic and altogether boring reply. Shall we not just call it a day, I am genuinely bored talking to you.

Correct. Most bodybuilders are massively unfit, it is a cosmetic thing. I've been to a lot of bodybuilding shows, they're stood around smoking to suppress their appetites, some have a bit of red wine or brandy pre-show to dehydrate their bodies and achieve the ripped look. Some guys do cardio work, but this is very rare and they're actually really unfit. This isn't up for debate, either, as it is common knowledge round my way.

As for Kell. A change in his fitness routine can be a double edged sword, you're getting into great shape, but you also run the risk of tweaks and strains to muscles that may have been underused. I'm not from Sheffield yet I know a few of Kell's people, there's no way he invented an injury to duck Alexander. Someone who knows the SP told me he was still trying to overcome the injury right down to the wire.

The only gripe I have with the whole thing is that Purdy got bumped into position despite the fact he failed the weight in his previous scheduled 147lb fight.

columbo wrote:That's the point I was making from the beginning. Just because Brook looked visually better, it doesnt mean his stamina would of been better.

columbo wrote: so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote:That's the point I was making from the beginning. Just because Brook looked visually better, it doesnt mean his stamina would of been better.

columbo wrote: so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote:That's the point I was making from the beginning. Just because Brook looked visually better, it doesnt mean his stamina would of been better.

columbo wrote: so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

Umm no I asked whether bodybuilders didnt need any fitness.... That doesnt mean that they have great fitness though.

columbo wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

columbo wrote:That's the point I was making from the beginning. Just because Brook looked visually better, it doesnt mean his stamina would of been better.

columbo wrote: so bodybuilders dont need any fitness whatsover?

Umm no I asked whether bodybuilders didnt need any fitness.... That doesnt mean that they have great fitness though.

columbo wrote: well you were reviving a thread that hadnt been commented on in hours purely to try and find a fault in my argument! That's laughable.