why are smaller people faster than bigger people but not necessarily in running but in boxing?

why are smaller people faster than bigger people but not necessarily in running but in boxing?

Levers. Shorter arms less distance to travel, longer legs longer strides. (That's my guess).

Well I'm no expert either but here's my stab... I think its mainly the biomechanics of levers as jimdig says... The longer the limb the more power/energy it takes to move it. The easier it is to move something the faster it will move.

The other factors are power to weight ratios. The heavier something is the harder it is to move.

Short limbed light guys can move quickly, longer limbed heavy guys can't. In between these extremes are all sorts of body shapes. Obviously how the muscles are trained for power/speed/endurance has a big impact.

In boxing, Tyson was fast for a heavy. He was heavy for his size but powerful short legs and arms.

In sprinting, bolt with his long legs and huge stride length is faster than everyone when he gets to full speed but slower out of the blocks, as it's harder for him to get to full speed. Most successful indoor 60m sprinters are short and sticky.

it's quite simple, but I'm working now, so I can't really explain it, but for reference. at short distances, it's about acceleration, not top speed. Compare Adam Gemilli's 10m time with Bolts...

No idea on the physiology, but congratulations for the longest ever thread title.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:No idea on the physiology, but congratulations for the longest ever thread title.

... and also congratulations for repeating it word for word again in his post.

milkyboy wrote:Well I'm no expert either but here's my stab... I think its mainly the biomechanics of levers as jimdig says... The longer the limb the more power/energy it takes to move it. The easier it is to move something the faster it will move.

The other factors are power to weight ratios. The heavier something is the harder it is to move.

Short limbed light guys can move quickly, longer limbed heavy guys can't. In between these extremes are all sorts of body shapes. Obviously how the muscles are trained for power/speed/endurance has a big impact.

In boxing, Tyson was fast for a heavy. He was heavy for his size but powerful short legs and arms.

In sprinting, bolt with his long legs and huge stride length is faster than everyone when he gets to full speed but slower out of the blocks, as it's harder for him to get to full speed. Most successful indoor 60m sprinters are short and sticky.

Just to elaborate 60m guys are sometimes stocky as well as sticky   

Re kingy's point. If it's just 100m you're looking at, these guys accelerate to a maximum speed, can only physically hold it for around a second I believe and are then decelerating. The guys who finish stronger, like bolt have either hit their maximum speed later, or are decelerating slower... Or both.

Bolt is highly unusual in being able to generate that leg speed with his frame... He gets giant stride length without the normally associated significant loss of leg speed. He's also overcomes being less aerodynamic than most of his competitors

But ultimately 'fastest' depends on what distance you're measuring over.

Mechanics and physiology.

Lever length has been mentioned.

Another is muscle fibre type - short people tend to have more mesomorphic or mesomorphic body types so more proportion of fast twitch muscle fibres than taller people (endomorphs). OK I may have made that up...

But hearns had long levers but a ridiculously speed?

To try answer this as short (haha) as possible, Using the athletics analogy, which I think is the cause of the confusion - When Bolt runs, he takes an average of 42 steps, vs the field average of 48 steps. This does of course mean he covers more track than his competitors
per step (and is a freak in that his actual stride speed isnt altogether too bad at 6'5), but with regard to the topic we're discussing, more importantly means his stride speed is in fact slower than the average 100m runner. In other words, it takes longer for Bolt to complete one stride than it would take Adam Gemilli. This means he takes longer to reach full top speed. But with respect to this discussion, means a taller person is still slower to complete a full range of motion, which, in effect, is what throwing a punch is.

All the above is true kingy, the complicating factor is that in your example, if you mapped bolt's stride next to gemili's bolt would pass the point where gemilli's foot lands faster (but still in the air). So as a fighter if he was the same distance from his opponent as Gemilli, the punch would get there quicker, he'd just be able to throw it from a greater range... where it might seem slower.

Whichever, he is a freak and a bit of an exception to the rule regardless. Some of this is though about perception, shorter steps and punches from shorter guys travel less distance and therefore seem 'quicker'. The range of motion is completed quicker but the punch isn't necessarily quicker through the air.

Fingers, re hearns. He had long levers but also had broad shoulders and skinny arms, so the weight/power element mentioned earlier comes into it. He wasn't as fast as a cruiserweight when he'd bulked up.

Jeez, I'm boring myself here, god knows what it's doing to anyone having the misfortune to read it. That's rhetorical by the way, I don't need a poll on how sleep inducing my contributions are.

look, Gemili is a bad example compared to Bolt, but the list of 5'6 sprinters isn't long dammit

Gemili's was a good example with bolt... Two extremes. Wasn't actually arguing with you... Merely factoring in perception of speed, and how you choose to measure it. Dammit!

Oh, carry on then.

Any scenario that results in Lee Froch getting flattened is ideal. Even if the fan man lands on him

To make up for smaller people having tiny c**ks ??

I think I meant to post in the Froch Groves topic! D'oh!

Kingraf, you should have just said: stride length multiplied by stride frequency equals speed. Nothing complicated about that.

I disagree with lever length dictating speed in boxing. It dictates time to impact when thrown from distance.

I think milkys answer is best...

"the heavier something is the harder it is to move". 

Id say David Haye is faster than Carl Froch even though he is 3 divisions heavier.

Id also say Pacman is fast than Frampton and he is a fair few divisions higher.

These are just minor examples.....

But it is intriguing.

Would Vitali Klitshckos shots be quicker if he was a Welterweight?

Not necessarily true. Well it is generally true, but not necessarily true. With Hearns it's more a case of him having the body of a 147-160 fighter, despite his height. Moving up 15lbs in the 80s was a haphazard assignment, even if you had help - no supprise he lost some pace.

Milky has a good response regarding perception though.

The heavier something is the harder it is to move. Smaller can equal proportionally stronger (think olympic lifters). Proportionally stronger (smaller people) moving lighter things (their bodies) is easier than proportionally weaker (bigger people) moving heavy things (their bodies) hence potentially quicker. Then factor in lever lengths, percentage of fast twitch fibres, and training techniques (which might be identical between two boxers fighting in two very different categories).

Yup, milky was right.

You're talking about lifting foreign objects. And more to the point you're talking about strength. The speed you see in boxing is really just acceleration. More to the point the reason shorter lifters are able to lift a higher proportion of their weight is because they have a shorter range of motion, which means the expand less energy lifting huge weights. Not because they are proportionally stronger. I'm certain taller people could beach press a similar proportion of their weight if they were allowed to bench as far the short guy, rather than their full range of motion.

You're talking about lifting foreign objects. And more to the point you're talking about strength. The speed you see in boxing is really just acceleration. More to the point the reason shorter lifters are able to lift a higher proportion of their weight is because they have a shorter range of motion, which means the expand less energy lifting huge weights. Not because they are proportionally stronger. I'm certain taller people could beach press a similar proportion of their weight if they were allowed to bench as far the short guy, rather than their full range of motion.

Olympic lifters aren't categorised by height, they're categorised by weight, so, hypothetically, the levers could be the same length, therefore, in that instance, strength to weight ratio is independant of length.

Lighter lifters are stronger than heavier lifters (p4p) due to the fact: the force generated by muscles is not proportional to their cross-sectional area. In other words, an increase in muscle cross sectional produces a proportional increase in weight, but not in strength. This means as lifters gets heavier their strength, measured as a body weight ratio, decreases.

Limbs have mass. The larger the limb the heavier it is. The heavier it is the harder it us to move. The harder something is to move the slower it moves.
To move something fast requires power. Power is a function of strength and speed. Smaller muscles are proportionaly stronger than larger muscles. If the composition of the aforementioned muscles comprised the same number a fast twitch fibres then the smaller muscle would generate more power (p4p) than the larger muscle. The increased power (p4p) would allow them to move light objects (measured as a proportion of their body weight), such as limbs, faster.

Yup, milky was right!

lower centre of gravity

I like 3fingers (As the actress said to the bishop). He's said 'milky was right' more times in one thread than the combined board has managed in several years. Good man.

I don't think I have the energy any more. Milky can be right, I can't be bothered.

Following your line of thinking, it's quite apparent that Adam Gemili produces more power per square centimeter, than Bolt, and covers more distance quicker in proportion to his weight, therefore, he is proportionally faster than Bolt, and thus, Short people are proportionally faster than tall people,

Following your line of thinking, it's quite apparent that Adam Gemili produces more power per square centimeter, than Bolt, and covers more distance quicker in proportion to his weight, therefore, he is proportionally faster than Bolt, and thus, Short people are proportionally faster than tall people,

Hahahahaha

All I was trying to find out is why flyWEIGHTS are faster than heavyWEIGHTS. I'm satisfied. Cheers for everyones contribution.

......especially milkys, which was the correct contribution.

3fingers wrote:......especially milkys, which was the correct contribution.

Good post  

I wonder who gets around a ring quicker, wlad or say Donaire and how much difference there is in it?

I think Wlad does, if I'm honest, watching the Sanders, and Brewster fights, he covered some serious real estate when he got rocked.

Hmmm, are bigger people faster than smaller people running backwards? Fancy comparing wlad and hector camacho for us kingy... in the battle of reverse gears?

Surely we could just upload a video of Camacho backtracking, and compare it with Wlad on queer street?

Surely we could just upload a video of Camacho backtracking, and compare it with Wlad on queer street?