Boxers Prime years

[Hands of Iron]

Originally Posted by J Griz 757

That happens allllllll the time here.

So make Tyson the same fighter in 1996 that he was in 1991. That'll keep the real truth away.

[bailey]

I always felt that R Hatton and C Froch were past their peaks when they won their world titles but only just.
G Johnson also.

But peak years really depends, some adapt and do better when adapted with new smarts

[HenrySwanson]

Depends on the boxer and his style.

[DanishFightfan]

Biologically speaking.. I believe that the male body is fully devopled at age 22,23 or 24, or in that range atleast...
The testerone production and metabolism will useually slow down in the early to mid 30s..
Of course in boxing experience and mental state is also a big part of when a fighter is in his "prime"..

I think if you should give a stiff answer to this thread, i would say 25-30

[Derrick-Rose]

i think it also has something to do with the Age you start Boxing first.

Especially Mexican fighters who start Boxing as a lil Kid are shot to shit in their late 20s or early 30s (Vargas, Benitez etc) while Boxers who started to fight as teenager or even later (Martinez, Klitschko, Marciano etc) are still game at their mid 30s

[SoxNation]

Originally Posted by DanishFightfan

Biologically speaking.. I believe that the male body is fully devopled at age 22,23 or 24, or in that range atleast...
The testerone production and metabolism will useually slow down in the early to mid 30s..
Of course in boxing experience and mental state is also a big part of when a fighter is in his "prime"..

I think if you should give a stiff answer to this thread, i would say 25-30

I believe the male body is fully developed by 25.

Metabolism begins to slow down at 20 years of age.

[SoxNation]

The prime of a fighter can't be described by age. It has more to do with an individual fighter's physical make up, but it mainly has to do with the wear and tear he that he suffers over time. Some fighters fall apart in their 20's, while some last into their 30's, because of these factors.

[DanishFightfan]

Originally Posted by SoxNation

I believe the male body is fully developed by 25.

Metabolism begins to slow down at 20 years of age.

Already at 20?
It makes sense.. As the body stops growing..

[lefe]

Originally Posted by Skittlez

If it makes you sleep better at night, I can lie and say Wlad will fight on until he's 50.Actually he can in this era because it is full of retards.

We all love Wlad and we all know he is GOAT let's not cross into the lines of delusion and think for a moment Wlad at age 37-38 could survive against guys like Prime Bowe orYoung Lewis. Luckily FOR US klittards they don't exist in this era so our idol can go on forever

I am not Klitsckos big fan but he is better than ever at age 36.Maybe he would not survive prime Bowe or Lewis but young Wladimir has much less chance vs Bowe,Lewis,Tyson than this Wladimir.

[DrBanzai]

Originally Posted by SoxNation

I believe the male body is fully developed by 25.

Metabolism begins to slow down at 20 years of age.

Body ( bone growth) by about 21, brain and endocrine system by 23-25.

Metabolism does not start slowing by 20 though.

Prime is 20-30 for smaller faster fighters, big guys who are power punchers are more in the 25-35 range. When young fighters like Tyson get their ass kicked by a journeyman the Tyson fans like to say he was past his prime. Excuses are like arm pits, the real truth is he was prime and lost.

[Danebrogen]

Originally Posted by irishny

Against Holyfield, he was the same weight and just as cut as he ever was in his early years.

You sir are truely a scholar of boxing. I mean the logical deduction you employed here is beyond brilliant. You have found a fool proof way of determining whether a fighter is in his prime or not, you just have to look at his physique.

I just saw Mike Tyson Vs Clifford Etienne on youtube and his body was in great shape, weighing less than 2kgs more than his second fight with Holyfield! Obviously a prime a Mike Tyson in action as late as 2003 and 37 years of age!

[irishny]

Originally Posted by Hands of Iron

So make Tyson the same fighter in 1996 that he was in 1991. That'll keep the real truth away.

In 1991, Tyson was going toe to toe with Razor Ruddock,who Lewis decimated in 2 rounds in 1992.

[irishny]

Originally Posted by Danebrogen

You sir are truely a scholar of boxing. I mean the logical deduction you employed here is beyond brilliant. You have found a fool proof way of determining whether a fighter is in his prime or not, you just have to look at his physique.

I just saw Mike Tyson Vs Clifford Etienne on youtube and his body was in great shape, weighing less than 2kgs more than his second fight with Holyfield! Obviously a prime a Mike Tyson in action as late as 2003 and 37 years of age!

Any evidence to back up a claim to the contrary?

Any evidence to prove that Tyson was some sort of genetic abnormality who went past his prime in his 20s despite being great shape?

He was 29/30 when he fought Holyfield. So he certainly wasnt past his peak age wise, he was the same weight, same muscle definition so he was clearly training.

Yet people here try to pretend that somehow,for some reason he was past his prime just because he got beaten.

If Tyson could have somehow fought the 1996 version of Holyfield in 1991, the same thing would have happened.

[KidDynamite]

Originally Posted by irishny

In 1991, Tyson was going toe to toe with Razor Ruddock,who Lewis decimated in 2 rounds in 1992.

Ruddock himself said that those fights with Tyson practically finished him as a top level fighter.

And good job for showing us that Lewis fights nothing but Tyson left overs.

Face it, Lewis is nobody and Tyson is arguably the most famous and well known combat athlete in history.

[Hands of Iron]

Originally Posted by irishny

In 1991, Tyson was going toe to toe with Razor Ruddock,who Lewis decimated in 2 rounds in 1992.

After Tyson beat on him for 19 rounds and (literally) broke his jaw?

Originally Posted by irishny

Any evidence to back up a claim to the contrary?

Any evidence to prove that Tyson was some sort of genetic abnormality who went past his prime in his 20s despite being great shape?

He was 29/30 when he fought Holyfield. So he certainly wasnt past his peak age wise, he was the same weight, same muscle definition so he was clearly training.

Yet people here try to pretend that somehow,for some reason he was past his prime just because he got beaten.

If Tyson could have somehow fought the 1996 version of Holyfield in 1991, the same thing would have happened.

Watching the fights would help... If you can't see the difference between 1991 Tyson and 1996, then you're beyond it. And no, the argument is 1991 Holyfield as you said it would've been the same result back then. They were both different fighters.