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?
Printable View
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SRR
Why make the fucking poll then if you think that? Why should we all nominate a ring size if it don't mean shit?Quote:
Originally Posted by fanjohnRing 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SRR
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by KelWhy make the fucking poll then if you think that? Why should we all nominate a ring size if it don't mean shit?Quote:
Originally Posted by fanjohnRing 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SRR
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.
I was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheep
Yes...Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepI was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
How about they try an octagon?
Or could just keep it realQuote:
Originally Posted by FensterYes...Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepI was actually thinking a 5' x 30' one would make it interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
How about they try an octagon?
http://brendlerentals.com/images/gal...ngRing_LRG.jpg
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.
Agreed this is worst then when taeth and jonesjrmayweather were arguing about Mayweather's calf size.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan