Originally Posted by BoppaZoo
How do you know Haye beats Fulton. Its all guess work.
But i know for a FACT because of research men back then were stronger than men of today.
Mate who the **** are you anyway. Apart from another annoying new ESB troll.
You say your a fan of boxing.
You want me to believe that Fred Fulton a man who BEAT SAM LANGFORD twice , once by KO is to lose to David Haye. Well maybe he might then again like i said maybe he KO's Haye in the first round.
But i can ****ing tell you this Sam Langford is 100 times the fighter David Haye ever will be.
And you are saying Fulton is ****. Get a ****ing Clue NEWBIE.
i think that study relates to the general population as these days ppl hardly walk, climb stairs or manually lift heavy things. But to compare the strength and conditioning training of today with yesteryears labouring is a bit of a stretch. imo for wat its worth, fighters of today would have quite an advantage over those of the past. my reasoning is that strength, conditioning and supplements are light yrs ahead. Not to mention that boxing as a sport has evolved to become more effective. kinda the same as comparing a car from 1920's to today.
thats not to say they would have more potential if all things were even...