Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

 
  


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-08-2012, 07:15 PM   #91
hernanday
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
There is another issue here.

At any given point of time, it is statisticaly unlikley that the best fighter in the history of a given weight class will be active.

So obviously there are going to be more great fighters who can be termed "old timers", than great fighters who are curently active.

Fighters active at the moment include Pacquio, Mayweather, Ward and Klitschko junior.
Ward is a great now . He is on the right track to be a great, I'd say he is a great-prospect, lets see how he looks at 30-40 fights, if he is still whipping guys the same, then he could be a great.

Mayweather - I've already commented on him. great at making money and dodging guys who could ever beat him

Klitschko- He is in a tomato field. Its not fully his fault. But when I see how corrie sanders demolished him and his difficulties with lamon brewster, and him being rope a doped by ross puritty, it makes me raise an eyebrow. These were not Hashim Rockman lucky punches that blind sided him when he was joking around, you are talking about early round knock outs where his opponent just completely destroyed him, outclass, outskilled, and outpunched him. The whole corrie sanders thing leads me to believe the Vlad is objectively a mid-low grade contender rather than a champion fighting in an era where the next best fighter are journeymen. Then you have the whole Klitschkos refusing to fight a guy 10 years their senior, evander holyfield, who has been calling them out ever since he was robbed in the valuev fight. I can't think of any other champion who has refused to fight a 50 year old man so consistently. Further Vlad has not even faced highly skilled opponents, never faced anyone with great head movement nor head speed, nor knock out power, so in several areas he is untested. I could be wron, maybe vlad is great and I just can't see it because there is too much tomato in the way. Vlad vs a Lomachencko style fighter is what is missing from his resume, someone who actually knows how to beat bigger people. It also seems he has lots of trouble beating people who are near in height to him who he can't just jab all fight long. he is skilled, but its like a 6/10 beating guys who are 3/10 sure it will look impressive for him to beat them.

Pacquiao - probably will be remembered as great.
hernanday is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2012, 07:34 PM   #92
hernanday
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
There is another issue here.

At any given point of time, it is statisticaly unlikley that the best fighter in the history of a given weight class will be active.

So obviously there are going to be more great fighters who can be termed "old timers", than great fighters who are curently active.

Fighters active at the moment include Pacquio, Mayweather, Ward and Klitschko junior.
Ward is a great now . He is on the right track to be a great, I'd say he is a great-prospect, lets see how he looks at 30-40 fights, if he is still whipping guys the same, then he could be a great.

Mayweather - I've already commented on him. great at making money and dodging guys who could ever beat him

Klitschko- He is in a tomato field. Its not fully his fault. But when I see how corrie sanders demolished him and his difficulties with lamon brewster, and him being rope a doped by ross puritty, it makes me raise an eyebrow. These were not Hashim Rockman lucky punches that blind sided him when he was joking around, you are talking about early round knock outs where his opponent just completely destroyed him, outclass, outskilled, and outpunched him. The whole corrie sanders thing leads me to believe the Vlad is objectively a mid-low grade contender rather than a champion fighting in an era where the next best fighter are journeymen. Then you have the whole Klitschkos refusing to fight a guy 10 years their senior, evander holyfield, who has been calling them out ever since he was robbed in the valuev fight. I can't think of any other champion who has refused to fight a 50 year old man so consistently. Further Vlad has not even faced highly skilled opponents, never faced anyone with great head movement nor head speed, nor knock out power, so in several areas he is untested. I could be wron, maybe vlad is great and I just can't see it because there is too much tomato in the way. Vlad vs a Lomachencko style fighter is what is missing from his resume, someone who actually knows how to beat bigger people. It also seems he has lots of trouble beating people who are near in height to him who he can't just jab all fight long. he is skilled, but its like a 6/10 beating guys who are 3/10 sure it will look impressive for him to beat them.

Pacquiao - probably will be remembered as great.
hernanday is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2012, 08:34 PM   #93
Seamus
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 12,313
vCash: 1000
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Boxers are far better today than in any era previous.

A Corvette Stingray is fun to look at but it gets blown away by a Bugatti Veyron. Simple enough, things progress. Bolt would blow the doors off Owen. Klitschko would humiliate Louis, Marciano and Ali.

All hail progress.
Seamus is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-08-2012, 09:32 PM   #94
SugarShane_24
ESB good-looking member
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: the few, the proud, the Philippines
Posts: 4,439
vCash: 75
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

I guess the answer is having more fights.

Actual fights itself is the only one that can bring the necessary experience needed by a fighter.

In my personal observation, a veteran who has 50 fight experience can display some economy of movement in order to achieve such results compared to a very talented youngster with only 20 fights can only practice in the gym.

Look at Bernard Hopkins, he's near 50, yet still able to compete with younger guys and sometimes make them look uncomfortable, or downright silly. That's because the man has learned the very basics of his craft. And he's even learned some "dirty" stuff which was designed to play mind games on the opponent.
SugarShane_24 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2012, 09:58 PM   #95
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hernanday View Post
Ward is a great now . He is on the right track to be a great, I'd say he is a great-prospect, lets see how he looks at 30-40 fights, if he is still whipping guys the same, then he could be a great.

Mayweather - I've already commented on him. great at making money and dodging guys who could ever beat him

Klitschko- He is in a tomato field. Its not fully his fault. But when I see how corrie sanders demolished him and his difficulties with lamon brewster, and him being rope a doped by ross puritty, it makes me raise an eyebrow. These were not Hashim Rockman lucky punches that blind sided him when he was joking around, you are talking about early round knock outs where his opponent just completely destroyed him, outclass, outskilled, and outpunched him. The whole corrie sanders thing leads me to believe the Vlad is objectively a mid-low grade contender rather than a champion fighting in an era where the next best fighter are journeymen. Then you have the whole Klitschkos refusing to fight a guy 10 years their senior, evander holyfield, who has been calling them out ever since he was robbed in the valuev fight. I can't think of any other champion who has refused to fight a 50 year old man so consistently. Further Vlad has not even faced highly skilled opponents, never faced anyone with great head movement nor head speed, nor knock out power, so in several areas he is untested. I could be wron, maybe vlad is great and I just can't see it because there is too much tomato in the way. Vlad vs a Lomachencko style fighter is what is missing from his resume, someone who actually knows how to beat bigger people. It also seems he has lots of trouble beating people who are near in height to him who he can't just jab all fight long. he is skilled, but its like a 6/10 beating guys who are 3/10 sure it will look impressive for him to beat them.

Pacquiao - probably will be remembered as great.

Wlad is twice the fighter he was when he last lost. True champions do not fight 50 year old men not named Hopkins, they should ignore Evander. David Haye is a terrific mover, with dynamite speed and knockout power. Samuel Peter has knockout power. Chris Byrd had amazing head movement. Chris Byrd, Tony Thompson, David Haye and Calvin Brock were all very skilled.

You sell Wlad very, very short because of losses. One can pick apart any fighter based on who beat him, because very few have ever avoided an L. Sometimes, folks, a fighter just has a bad night.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2012, 10:54 PM   #96
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,879
vCash: 1210
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hernanday View Post
If you hold the title for 11 years I'd imagine your run out of real opponents. It would not surprise me if half of those bums would beat the bums fighting today, because those bums back then were probably more desperate for it.
So you know better than the writers/experts who lived during that time and saw those fighters in a lot of fights?
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 12:31 AM   #97
hernanday
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13 View Post
So you know better than the writers/experts who lived during that time and saw those fighters in a lot of fights?
The experts who were alive at that time all insist Joe Louis was the greatest boxer who ever live inspite of ali, in fact I recall a video of cus d'amato telling ali how joe louis would whip his butt and Ali responded by saying old man slow joe louis beat me !

Alot of those bums, would beat the bums in the ring today. And at one time many great boxers like braddock were literally bums and dead broke.
hernanday is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 12:33 AM   #98
hernanday
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
Boxers are far better today than in any era previous.

A Corvette Stingray is fun to look at but it gets blown away by a Bugatti Veyron. Simple enough, things progress. Bolt would blow the doors off Owen. Klitschko would humiliate Louis, Marciano and Ali.

All hail progress.
Troll post I suppose. You are aware that Klitschko ducks evander holyfield?
hernanday is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 01:10 AM   #99
hernanday
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnaNasakki View Post
Wlad is twice the fighter he was when he last lost. True champions do not fight 50 year old men not named Hopkins, they should ignore Evander. David Haye is a terrific mover, with dynamite speed and knockout power. Samuel Peter has knockout power. Chris Byrd had amazing head movement. Chris Byrd, Tony Thompson, David Haye and Calvin Brock were all very skilled.

You sell Wlad very, very short because of losses. One can pick apart any fighter based on who beat him, because very few have ever avoided an L. Sometimes, folks, a fighter just has a bad night.
So Vlad is 2x the fighter now from 10 fights ago? Vlad's competition level has not increased. As I said its not his fault he crushes tomato, the only heavyweight out there who could make the top 25 HW since Lennox retired is Holyfield who he is dodging and Vitali. He is a true champion by avoiding the only 2 guys around who can beat him


David haye fought klitschko with a broken toe, so much for his moving and speed,and he claimed his broken toe prevented him from moving which would basically prevent you from using your speed.

The rest of the guys you gotta to be kidding, why not throw in samuel peter as the most prolific puncher in boxing history. Never mind the huge advantage of having your brother fight and beat up guys in advance for you.

You are right, there is a blue print to beat Vlad and all of the blue prints are different. 1 guy rope a doped him, 1 guy was a power hooker who hooked him out, another guy was hand quick and his height and hit well so his jab was turned useless. Vitali lost by damaging his arm and quiting, and the other one was a stoppage losing to the best boxer of his era. No shame in either of his loses so I won't sell him short.

Vlad was 24-0 when he was rope a doped, I'd expect a fighter with 24 wins not to fall for that, in light of the fact that the rope a dope is not a new unheard style of fighting in the 90s. Then he was 40-1, assuming he wasn't crushing tomatoes, he should be able to dominate anything but a highly skilled fighter with 40+ wins. If you are great, you should only be losing to other great boxers or fluke punches that hit you off guard out of place, like a 1 punch overhand right that nails your chin. But thats not what happens, Sanders just outclassed him, then brewster. And anyone who hasn't seen it needs to. I've never seen a champion fighter so utterly destroyed by a fringe fighter. These are after he has 40 pro fights. It almost remind me of when Larry Holmes said I just want to beat up on little guys. Seems like that is what K is doing.

If he had losses early in his career and recovered, it not seem so bad, its how he lost and when.
hernanday is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 02:29 AM   #100
TheSouthpaw
Champion
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 3,947
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

[quote=louis3749;13946645]
Quote:
Originally Posted by young griffo View Post

Ok, don't know if this is targeted at me, but that's just my two cents, explained in a more generalized way, with a couple of specifics. Jeez.
No..it was harmless my man..
TheSouthpaw is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 02:30 AM   #101
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
Boxers are far better today than in any era previous.

A Corvette Stingray is fun to look at but it gets blown away by a Bugatti Veyron. Simple enough, things progress. Bolt would blow the doors off Owen. Klitschko would humiliate Louis, Marciano and Ali.

All hail progress.
Yeah, and Mayweather would beat Hearns, Leonard and Robinson, oh, wait...
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 02:35 AM   #102
recycling
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 222
vCash: 500
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

What's funny is that in an Mma forum one guy made a thread saying not to compare Jon jones as the mike Tyson of Mma cuz he isn't. Just because Mma is a young sport and hasn't peaked. But boxing hails srr from ages ago as the best boxer undisputed. What if usain bolt existed back then??
recycling is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 02:39 AM   #103
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,853
vCash: 75
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Die.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 02:46 AM   #104
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,879
vCash: 1210
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hernanday View Post
The experts who were alive at that time all insist Joe Louis was the greatest boxer who ever live inspite of ali, in fact I recall a video of cus d'amato telling ali how joe louis would whip his butt and Ali responded by saying old man slow joe louis beat me !

Alot of those bums, would beat the bums in the ring today. And at one time many great boxers like braddock were literally bums and dead broke.
You are making assumptions.

"All experts who were alive claimed Joe Louis was the greatest boxer who ever lived"? I don't think you can find many experts from that time who made such claim.

They would beat the "bums" of today based on whose opinion? Are you an expert on 1930-1940s heavyweights, or is it a claim made by somebody who was born about 100 years ago and is still alive, who had seen those heavyweights fights live?

Braddock a great boxer? Give me a break. He wasn't great even for heavyweight division, regardless of weight he'd have a hard time getting in Top 500.

Anyway, my point was, yes Joe Louis looks great on film, offensively. But probably that was because he was facing very weak opposition? Ie, the same thing the Klitschko brothers are being accused of now.
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 03:49 AM   #105
bodhi
So I can die easy ...
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,491
vCash: 1337
Default Re: How were old timers so good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pachilles View Post
It depends when you're talking about. 40's to 90's are at a similar skill level. The 30's and the 00's are a step below overall. The 20's and before fighters were absolute dogshite
Ah, come one. You are somewhat right for the pre-20s which had to do with vastly different rules. Under their own rules a lot of them were more skilled than todayīs fighters. Which is true for the other way around as well. And still there were exceptions as the aforementioned Gans, McFarland and Driscoll which would count as very skilled even today.
But a lot changed from the 20s onwards. Ture the 20s were a transition period but you had a lot of skilled fighters there as well like M.Gibbons, Tunney, B. Leonard and then you had loads and loads of skilled fightes in the 30s which easily would have been able to compete with their 40s through 90s counterparts like Ross, Canzoneri, Kid Chocolate, Louis, Armstrong. Not to forget that fighters like Robinson and Pep learned their craft and started their careers in the 30s.
And even in the last 12 years you have skilled guys like Mayweather, Hopkins, Marquez, Pac, MAB, Morales and quite a few others. The main difference between them and the guys from the 30s through 70s is that they fight (each other) less often. But I donīt think they are much worse.

In fact, I donīt think at the very top is much of a difference in the history of gloved boxing. Not at all. The difference is on contender level and underneath, where there are just (a lot) less skilled guys in some eras.

Boxing is a craft and like in any craft you get better in it when you are practicing it. In the past fighters fought more and such on average were better. Of course a talented fighter today with some experience is better than an average guy from back then with loads of it. No doubt. Also no doubt that thanks to more scientific training - also I think too much focus is on the training of athleticism nowadays - and nutrition fighters on average are more athletically talented than in the past which is an advantage but without this athelticism beeing paired with experience it will be more flash than substance.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
Boxers are far better today than in any era previous.

A Corvette Stingray is fun to look at but it gets blown away by a Bugatti Veyron. Simple enough, things progress. Bolt would blow the doors off Owen. Klitschko would humiliate Louis, Marciano and Ali.

All hail progress.
Simple opinions for simple minds.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13 View Post
So you know better than the writers/experts who lived during that time and saw those fighters in a lot of fights?
Ah, come on, you know better than that, Louis beat quite a few very good, even great hws, before, during adn after his reign. Yeah, he fought his fair share of average fighters but who didnīt?
"Bum of the month club" is sensational journalism, easy to throw around but meaningless in the end.
bodhi is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013