Thread: What ring size you favor for Floyd-Pacquiao fight?

Standard ring size varies from 16 to 24 feet to a side. The recent Pacquiao-Cotto fight used a 20' x 20' ring.

What ring size you favor for Floyd-Pacquiao fight?

I think a 16' x 16' ring will help to create more engagement/clashes in the fight.

20 x 20 = compromise = no one can bitch about either fighter having an inherent advantage based purely on ring size.

Originally Posted by SRR

20 x 20 = compromise = no one can bitch about either fighter having an inherent advantage based purely on ring size.

Ring size won't give an advantage to either boxer but I think smaller ring can help create more action in the fight which is better for the paying fans.

Originally Posted by fanjohn

Originally Posted by SRR

20 x 20 = compromise = no one can bitch about either fighter having an inherent advantage based purely on ring size.

Ring size won't give an advantage to either boxer but I think smaller ring can help create more action in the fight which is better for the paying fans.

Why make the fucking poll then if you think that? Why should we all nominate a ring size if it don't mean shit?

Originally Posted by Kel

Originally Posted by fanjohn

Originally Posted by SRR

20 x 20 = compromise = no one can bitch about either fighter having an inherent advantage based purely on ring size.

Ring size won't give an advantage to either boxer but I think smaller ring can help create more action in the fight which is better for the paying fans.

Why make the fucking poll then if you think that? Why should we all nominate a ring size if it don't mean shit?

OK so what's your take about the ring size? Does a particular ring size would favor one boxer? Please enlightened us with your opinion on this matter.

I agree that given the tools both fighters have the size of the ring doesn't matter a whole lot, although a smaller ring would give PAC a slight advantage and conversely a larger ring would give PBF a slight advantage. I think 16' x 16' rings should be standardized for all weight classes 154 and below and 20' x 20' rings for Middleweight and above. There really is no reason for a ring bigger than that.

A square one helps.

Originally Posted by Fenster

A square one helps.

I was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.

Originally Posted by killersheep

I agree that given the tools both fighters have the size of the ring doesn't matter a whole lot, although a smaller ring would give PAC a slight advantage and conversely a larger ring would give PBF a slight advantage. I think 16' x 16' rings should be standardized for all weight classes 154 and below and 20' x 20' rings for Middleweight and above. There really is no reason for a ring bigger than that.

Well said mate. These 2 are the best boxers in our generation and ring size won't matter much for these 2 boxers. But I favor a smaller ring thinking it will generate more engagement and actions.

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by Fenster

A square one helps.

I was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.

Yes...

How about they try an octagon?

Originally Posted by Fenster

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by Fenster

A square one helps.

I was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.

Yes...

How about they try an octagon?

Or could just keep it real

The bigger the ring is, the biggest are the chances that Mayweather might perform another classical volume of dancing with the stars. I would go with 20 x 20 as it sounds fair for everybody, being in the middle of what would advantage too much Pacman or Mayweather. a 16x16 would surely help to stir up action and excitement but I think 20x20 is the most honest compromise.

Worst thread ever? Maybe.

Originally Posted by OumaFan

Worst thread ever? Maybe.

Agreed this is worst then when taeth and jonesjrmayweather were arguing about Mayweather's calf size.