ESB Essay Writing Competition: Comparing fighters from different eras

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

This conversation is going in circles, though.

"Boxing has progressed because measurable sports have progressed"

"What about changes in technique and equipment?"

"These don't matter, because modern athletes are fitter"

"How do you know they're fitter?"

"Look at the measurable sports records".

That is because you are choosing to go down that route, in full knowledge that nothing can be proven because boxing is not measurable -fullstop- Despite it being quite clear that every other non-measurable sports, in one way or another has progressed -fullstop- If is safe to assume, thanks to modern training principles and sports science - boxers are overall slightly faster, stronger and fitter (for the purpose of boxing in a modern ruleset) -fullstop- I don't care if Rocky Balboa beat Ivan Drago or not -fullstop-

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by Decebal

Then a good question would be: do you think that the past greats would have been even better if, whilst benefiting from every positive aspect of their actual training, they would have had a modern-day nutritionist, physiotherapist and fittness trainer?

Yes they would -fullstop-

[Decebal]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Modern boxers are every bit as fit as their less modern counterparts for what they do.

There may be a slight difference in real terms as modern fighters train for 12 rounds.

I think this is a very good point. It was made in the essays as well. Each generation trains for the fight that it actually fights for, and eventually, you develop golden standards.

[cross_trainer]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Why do you think they are fitter?

Because, even though trainers can't quite get the perfect mix (due to the reasons I mentioned above), their techniques of training for specific aspects of the game have improved slightly. There HAVE been slight improvements in comparable sports--old hammer distances have increased, the deadlift is slightly better now, and so on. Just not as much as many believe.

Of course, *supplementation* helps too.

But the "modern athletes steamroll old-timers" gets a little ridiculous--as if modern fighters have evolved genetically into supermen because of their training. Even today, you could train a modern person using "old school" techniques and produce a champion...and many have.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Decebal

Then a good question would be: do you think that the past greats would have been even better if, whilst benefiting from every positive aspect of their actual training, they would have had a modern-day nutritionist, physiotherapist and fittness trainer?

Depends really, upon the great.

But let's not dress this up. Jack Johnson knew that he needed a lot of protein but avoided lots of red meat because his personal experience was it made him sluggish. However, he loved to eat steak, and did.

Greb new he would be better if he wasn't pissed half the time. But on it went.

I personally think it is more about the man than the information and help he has. Let's say that Greb would have been better if he had more discipline, first and foremost.

I think good nutrition is more about good training than good fighting, personally.

[Amsterdam]

The fact that Greb could get away with that non sense and still stay the best of his era is not telling of his greatness, but of the era itself.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

Because, even though trainers can't quite get the perfect mix (due to the reasons I mentioned above), their techniques of training for specific aspects of the game have improved slightly. There HAVE been slight improvements in comparable sports--old hammer distances have increased, the deadlift is slightly better now, and so on. Just not as much as many believe.

OK. But Louis trained for 15 rounds. He did 16 on the bags, and sparred more because of this. Why will he have less stamina - or fitness - than Chagaev?

But the "modern athletes steamroll old-timers" gets a little ridiculous--as if modern fighters have evolved genetically into supermen because of their training. Even today, you could train a modern person using "old school" techniques and produce a champion...and many have.

Yes. It also needs to be said that guys like Greb stayed fit primarily through boxing rather than training. That makes for an interesting machine more specialised than a person who is trained very specifically for his discipline.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Amsterdam

The fact that Greb could get away with that non sense and still stay the best of his era is not telling of his greatness, but of the era itself.

Tapia's era too.

And Monzon's.

And Duran's.

[Decebal]

Originally Posted by McGrain

I think good nutrition is more about good training than good fighting, personally.

I agree with what you said. Modern day athletes benefit from motivational coaching too, though, in a way that their predecessors didn't. So many more of them will be disciplined and focussed. Impossible to say if more motivated too, though. As to the point that I quoted, surely to a certain extent better training leads to better fighting, right?

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

But the "modern athletes steamroll old-timers" gets a little ridiculous--as if modern fighters have evolved genetically into supermen because of their training. Even today, you could train a modern person using "old school" techniques and produce a champion...and many have.

I agree with that for the most part -fullstop- Nobody is getting steamrolled -fullstop-

[cross_trainer]

Originally Posted by China_hand_Joe

That is because you are choosing to go down that route, in full knowledge that nothing can be proven because boxing is not measurable -fullstop- Despite it being quite clear that every other non-measurable sports, in one way or another has progressed

That is what this is about. Measurable sports haven't progressed much, taking rule changes into account. I've given several examples. Now you say that non-measurable sports have advanced as well--how do you intend to prove this, given that the measurable sports don't strongly support your argument?

I gave my answer, which is:


Training has improved somewhat, but not massively (as corroborated by sports in which technique and conditions remain stable). Boxing technique hit a critical mass around Joe Louis's time, and has remained pretty much the same ever since. But since modern boxers come from a ten year talent pool (as opposed to seventy) and don't have as much experience, they aren't going to wipe out the ATG's.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Decebal

Modern day athletes benefit from motivational coaching too, though, in a way that their predecessors didn't. So many more of them will be disciplined and focussed. Impossible to say if more motivated too, though.

I am starting to sound like an old-school nut-hugger here. Let me say I see balance beween most eras of boxing and consider the peaks and troughs blips.

Old school guys would be much more motivated. Some of them had no money for food. If the difference between success and failure can be somewhere to live and not you dig straight through the hard rock at the bottom into the bile.

This is a generalisation and there will be exceptions, of course. The heavyweight champ for one seems to find it easier to stay focused in the modern era.

As to the point that I quoted, surely to a certain extent better training leads to better fighting, right?

That depends, as I said. Nutrition was and is no mystery. I am pretty sure I could impliment a really good eating program for another human, just as I have for myself. These guys knew. Some played by the rulese, some didn't.

I'd guess nutrition specific advances are rare and yield tiny dividends, if any.

[cross_trainer]

Originally Posted by McGrain

OK. But Louis trained for 15 rounds. He did 16 on the bags, and sparred more because of this. Why will he have less stamina - or fitness - than Chagaev?

He has more fitness, but he had to put more effort into it than Chagaev to get the same payoff. The difference isn't vast, but Chagaev's methods are simply more time-efficient.

Originally Posted by McGrain

Yes. It also needs to be said that guys like Greb stayed fit primarily through boxing rather than training. That makes for an interesting machine more specialised than a person who is trained very specifically for his discipline.

Yes, that would tend to give him very high "specificity" scores. There's nothing like fighting to practice fighting, you might say.

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

That is what this is about. Measurable sports haven't progressed much, taking rule changes into account. I've given several examples. Now you say that non-measurable sports have advanced as well--how do you intend to prove this, given that the measurable sports don't strongly support your argument?

I would consider the changes in the measurable sports pretty massive in the last 60 years, in almost everything -fullstop-

[Decebal]

Originally Posted by Decebal

Then a good question would be: do you think that the past greats would have been even better if, whilst benefiting from every positive aspect of their actual training, they would have had a modern-day nutritionist, physiotherapist and fittness trainer?

because if they would have been better, it doesn't prove that modern fighters are better; it proves that old ATG fighters could be even better now.