Quote from: Wannabegiant on November 02, 2014, 01:34:59 AMBoxing isnt really that good of a reference for fighting though, its very limited so it doesnt represent the assumed disparity of fighting ability between short and tall men.
MMA is much better to compare, its much closer to real fighting and in that sport, short guys have just as much success as tall ones do overall, regardless of weight class.
I realize height and reach are definite advantages, but they are most of the time not significant enough to make a significant difference after all the other factors come into play.
Only a few fighters rely excessively on height and reach for their success, like Jon Jones. But he is lacking in his stand up skills, it can be argued that he simply isnt skilled at stand up, and his reach and height compensate for his average stand up skills. But it can also be argued that his reach and body build makes it more difficult to develop good technique, form, handspeed and knockout power. Jones is lacking in all those areas, the only good standup skill he has is kicks but even his kicks lack power.
This is true. Boxing isn't a good example it's a sport with rules and conditions. There is a reason we feel intimidated by taller men in the natural kingdom size is usually an advantage. Alot of animals use size as an deterrant to stave off hunters, the blowfish for example.
It's reasonably common for the male to be male to be bigger in most species. Think about it does a 45 kg woman stand a chance against a 70 kg man? No -because body size (as long as it's muscles and not just fat) is a sign of strenght. Size isn't only just height a broad short man might very well be more intimidating than a skinny tall man. Bigger in every dimension equals more strenght and more dominance.
![http://statsstylescore.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/[email protected]](http://statsstylescore.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/hunt-vs.-struve-@ufc.jpg){kind=link}