Originally Posted by JAB5239
Amateur success doesn't always transfer to professional success. So your argument means very little. There's no way to say who would or wouldn't have been successful. And please point out where I ever said eastern Europeans wouldn't have been successful or have won world titles, of course they would have. My argument was against the ridiculous notion that Americans would have been in the same boat as today if they had competed. Sorry but they did compete, and America had a much higher talent level back then.
I don't agree america had a much higher talent level back then, I think it appears that way because there wasn't as much competition for them to be compared to.
America looks better in the 80s because the majority of the top tens were americans. But that is only because most of the best boxing nations were not competing.
Amateur success doesn't always transfer to pro success, you're right, but it is still relevant. It is unusual for a very good pro to not have been a good amateur unless they went pro very early.
If all the successful EE ams were going pro in the 80s the top tens woul look very much as they do now.