HBO Arm Length

[JonnieJ]

HBO have been measuring arm length as opposed to wingspan for a while now, I believe its really the way to go. But does anyone know for sure how they measure arm length, armpit to fist or armpit to fingertips? Also how deep in your into armpit?

[greynotsoold]

Randy Gordon started that more than 20 7ears ago- in fact, closer to 30 years ago. If I remember correctly, he measured from where your arm comes out of your shoulder to the tip of your middle knuckle when you make a fist.

[marbleheadmaui]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

[greynotsoold]

The distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face is pretty close to what Gordon was trying to do in the early 80s.

[marbleheadmaui]

The distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face is pretty close to what Gordon was trying to do in the early 80s.

Yup. I am surprised at how guys like Merchant and Max don't comment on it. Of course both of their attitudes may be "It's all about positioning one's feet anyway, so it doesn't matter that much."

[Taeth]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

The only thing that is covered by reach that isn't by arm length is the distance between the shoulders which doesn't matter at all except maybe fore power. When you reach out your arm the shoulder is fully extended in any direction, like a fully extended punch except maybe further because the arm is completely straight. ANything to do with shoulder extension is encorporated in arm length.

But like you said later, all that matters is where your feet are. Pacquiao has a tiny reach by either measure, and he fights at a distance better than almost anyone because he moves in so much and commits so fully to his punches.

[marbleheadmaui]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

The only thing that is covered by reach that isn't by arm length is the distance between the shoulders which doesn't matter at all except maybe fore power. When you reach out your arm the shoulder is fully extended in any direction, like a fully extended punch except maybe further because the arm is completely straight. ANything to do with shoulder extension is encorporated in arm length.
But like you said later, all that matters is where your feet are. Pacquiao has a tiny reach by either measure, and he fights at a distance better than almost anyone because he moves in so much and commits so fully to his punches.

That's just not true. The distance between the shoulder and the face is ignored. Those inches are as critical as any other inches unless you think the jab to the head isn't the most important single punch in boxing.

[JonnieJ]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

The only thing that is covered by reach that isn't by arm length is the distance between the shoulders which doesn't matter at all except maybe fore power. When you reach out your arm the shoulder is fully extended in any direction, like a fully extended punch except maybe further because the arm is completely straight. ANything to do with shoulder extension is encorporated in arm length.
But like you said later, all that matters is where your feet are. Pacquiao has a tiny reach by either measure, and he fights at a distance better than almost anyone because he moves in so much and commits so fully to his punches.

That's just not true. The distance between the shoulder and the face is ignored. Those inches are as critical as any other inches unless you think the jab to the head isn't the most important single punch in boxing.

Manny's reach may be small, but his arm length is pretty good for a guy of his size (25in I believe), not only that but when you fully extend your arm you also strech out your shoulder, so arm length includes the part of the shoulder that adds to your reach (the length of the collar bone area is not really important). Wingspan doesn't matter much, imo but arm length does. The only sport wingspan is relevant to is swimming.

[Taeth]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

The only thing that is covered by reach that isn't by arm length is the distance between the shoulders which doesn't matter at all except maybe fore power. When you reach out your arm the shoulder is fully extended in any direction, like a fully extended punch except maybe further because the arm is completely straight. ANything to do with shoulder extension is encorporated in arm length.
But like you said later, all that matters is where your feet are. Pacquiao has a tiny reach by either measure, and he fights at a distance better than almost anyone because he moves in so much and commits so fully to his punches.

That's just not true. The distance between the shoulder and the face is ignored. Those inches are as critical as any other inches unless you think the jab to the head isn't the most important single punch in boxing.

The only reason the jab is most important punch is because most people don't know how to move in with any other punch. It's more of a footwork problem than anything, and that's because boxers only watch other boxers to learn footwork and not other forms of fighting.

You can't take into account the distance from the shoulder to the face because nobody who knows anything about boxing stands perfectly sideways against an opponent, and the doesn't come out in that wingspan type posture. The only thing that matters is arm length. The way you would have to punch to utilize that distance between shoulder and the neck would be a berto type backhand jab.

[Taeth]

I completely disagree. What the HBO "arm-legth" measure measures is who has the edge punching the other guy's shoulder. WHO CARES! The single most important punch in controlling distance (perhaps the single most important step to winning a fight) is the jab to the head. So the distance across the shoulder (ignored by arm length) matters a great deal. REACH is the far better measure in demonstrating that.

Of course the best might well be the distance from a closed fist to the side of one's face when facing forward.

The other issue I have with it is, as a history buff, I have no way to compare "arm-length" of a current fighter with fighters of the past. But that is a seconday point.

The only thing that is covered by reach that isn't by arm length is the distance between the shoulders which doesn't matter at all except maybe fore power. When you reach out your arm the shoulder is fully extended in any direction, like a fully extended punch except maybe further because the arm is completely straight. ANything to do with shoulder extension is encorporated in arm length.
But like you said later, all that matters is where your feet are. Pacquiao has a tiny reach by either measure, and he fights at a distance better than almost anyone because he moves in so much and commits so fully to his punches.

That's just not true. The distance between the shoulder and the face is ignored. Those inches are as critical as any other inches unless you think the jab to the head isn't the most important single punch in boxing.

Manny's reach may be small, but his arm length is pretty good for a guy of his size (25in I believe), not only that but when you fully extend your arm you also strech out your shoulder, so arm length includes the part of the shoulder that adds to your reach (the length of the collar bone area is not really important). Wingspan doesn't matter much, imo but arm length does. The only sport wingspan is relevant to is swimming.

Originally they had up there, but it's more like 22-23 lately. Wingspan is relevant to a lot of sports.