People over 5 9"

Edit Post

Quote from: mrtall on August 30, 2014, 06:09:17 PMHe gets it more than you, that's for sure.

Tyson greatest boxer?

1. Tyson is above average height for his generation
2. Tyson got floored by 6'1 Holyfield, 6'3 Buster Douglas during his so called prime.

He was the best in the world for about 1 year, I'll give you that

Tyson was the reigning champion at only 19 years old gtfo kid you dont know what you are talking about.
No tyson was right on average height he even pitty himself for being so short but his trainer gus gave him confidence, seriousy dont comment when you dont know what you are talking about its annoying.
He was past his prime in both those fights, see you have not even followed the story about mike tyson nor have you watched all his fights. In his prime the cardio&power also the confidence he would destroy them all by the third round.

Edit Post

Doesn't seem like much can come out of arguing whether tall or short people are better than the other. I mean on LL Forum we have a bunch of users here considering CLL, most who are shorter than average, and it's not going to do any of them good to read posts about how shorter people are inherently inferior to taller people. At the same time it's not going to do any good trying to put down tall people either.

Edit Post

Quote from: KiloKAHN on August 30, 2014, 06:26:41 PMDoesn't seem like much can come out of arguing whether tall or short people are better than the other. I mean on LL Forum we have a bunch of users here considering CLL, most who are shorter than average, and it's not going to do any of them good to read posts about how shorter people are inherently inferior to taller people. At the same time it's not going to do any good trying to put down tall people either.

Agreed.

Edit Post

so @mrtall, you're 6'7", i would to know the thoughts from a very tall person about the ideal height.

Edit Post

Well this 182.5cm and mrtall are either trolls and/or really big losers. I feel kinda sad for you because you will never be happy, doesn't even matter how much you lengthen or shorten your legs. There are as many successful short people (Messi, Carlos Slim (richest person in the world and many more) as they are successful tall people and there are as many unsuccessful short people as there are unsuccessful tall people (182.5cm and mrtall for example).

The only thing that can maybe help you is a psychiatrist but you guys are so full of yourself that I really doubt that anyone can help you. Whatever you do, stop making the insecure short people here feel bad about themselves with your utter bull . 

Edit Post

Quote from: mrtall on August 30, 2014, 06:01:59 PMNo. Einstein was above average height for his era at 5'9.

Who cares who is more skilled at what? What matters is winning medals PERIOD.

Mayweather etc, might be best for their weight class, but they wouldn't even go 2 rounds against beaten up, worn out declining Ali.

infact, I think I could probably beat Mayweather.. is that supposed to impress me?

What matters to most is who is the toughest of all time? who is the fastest of all time? I don't care 2 cents that some 5'2 guy has faster handspeed.. I wanna know who is the baddest mofo on the planet as a total package.. and they, in 90% of cases are above 6'0 in all sports.

No, it doesnt matter if he was average of his time, since he would be short compared to todays standards, and still be way more intelligent than vast majority of todays men who are many inches taller than he was.

Who is more skilled matters when determining talent and talent earns you medals and accomplishments, so it definitely matters.

And speed and cardio are factors when determining athleticism, in addition to strength. Just because a fat 240 pound tall guy could beat mayweather doesnt make him more talented or athletic than Mayweather. People would laugh at that notion even.

Also many people consider Muhammed Ali the greatest based on nostalgia, he was great for sure, but based on your own logic, he shouldnt be considered the greatest when either of the Klitschko brothers are way bigger and would most definitely beat an Ali in his prime. Its similar when many people still consider Michael Jordan the greatest even though Lebron James is bigger and probably more athletic than him. Size is not the only attribute.

Edit Post

Quote from: 182.5cm on August 30, 2014, 06:13:22 PMi agree with @mrtall, tall men are generally more stronger, i think it's because they are heavier.
I play football, they are harder too push when they have the ball, and of course they can push you easier.
It's worse in handball or rugby, i never play rugby though, but it seems obvious.
I don't know wether tall men are faster, but they are stronger and have a better reach, which means they have an advantage in most sport especially the collective ones and martial arts.

Tall men are on average stronger due to having more mass, this is true. But strength is only one factor in determining athleticism. The tiny chinese dudes who take olympic medals regulary are more athletic than you and I despite the fact that we most likely can push them around or beat them in a fight.

If they are faster, In a 100 meter sprint contest then yeah because you dont need stamina and longer strides are favored. However i a sport like football where you need to accelerate many times in short distances and change directions a lot, shorter legs are better suited, which is why Messi makes everyone look like fools chasing him in the midfield time after time.

Longer reach and longer height are definite advantages in a fight for sure. But so are cardio and handspeed.

Look at Daniel Cormier an olympic wrestler who is 5'10 tall and weighs about 230 pounds. (a lot of that is fat in his case).
he is undefeated and has faced many HW fighters who where 6'4 and athletic as well as skilled in MMA, and destroyed them all. The main advantage when observing his fights is that he is faster than them, and more skilled (his wrestling mainly) better handspeed and movement. The bigger fighters he faced just has trouble reacting to his movements and their strength advantage was completely negated by his wrestling skill.

And btw these HW fighters he faced are the most talented HWs in the world, the average man that size is nowhere near as athletic or talented as the fighters in the UFC. So even at the highest level we find significantly shorter men destroying larger men in fighting.

Size is an advantage but there are so many other factors when determining the outcome of a fight.

Edit Post

Quote from: 182.5cm on August 30, 2014, 07:10:20 PMso @mrtall, you're 6'7", i would to know the thoughts from a very tall person about the ideal height.

Pinnacle is 6'2:

6'2 longest life expectancy
6'2 best all round athletic..
6'2 most aesthetic height (male model ideal)
6'2 dominant in social situations, but not scary.

did I mention chicks lol.

6' - 6'4 is master race range tho, I have been all these heights unlike everybody else here and I can confirm:)

However I'd rather be 5'10-5'11 than 6'5-6'6.. worlds just not designed for people past 6'4.

Edit Post

agree, from a 5'10 guy's point of view 6'0 - 6'4 is the best you can be with both ends being the minimal best and the maximum best

Edit Post

Quote from: mrtall on August 30, 2014, 07:56:26 PMPinnacle is 6'2:

6'2 longest life expectancy
6'2 best all round athletic..
6'2 most aesthetic height (male model ideal)
6'2 dominant in social situations, but not scary.

did I mention chicks lol.

6' - 6'4 is master race range tho, I have been all these heights unlike everybody else here and I can confirm:)

However I'd rather be 5'10-5'11 than 6'5-6'6.. worlds just not designed for people past 6'4.

This i can agree with, its seems to be mostly true at least, except i dont think 6'2 people have the longest life expectancy, pretty sure shorter people live longer.