Do you fail to understand...

What happens to some of the current beltholders if they were thrown back in time and had to cope with the type of training , nutrition, equipment and so on of that era. Probably more than half would be C level at best more than likely end up as club fighters.

 

I have always considered Marciano the biggest hype job in hw history.

 

There are fighters from any era that would translate to any other era and there are also a ton of fighters from older era's say pre 60's that simply would not translate at all.
SRR for instance would translate to any era and still be king, especially at WW. Joe Louis would translate to any era. Pep would translate to any era. Armstrong though wild, would be waaay to much man for most people in any era, though H2H there are people who beat him. Duran translates to any era. I could keep going but you get my point.

 

lol..
Im not saying that it is impossible to beat a bigger guy, or that you should be intiminated by it..
Im training karate, and i have fought plenty of guys 2-4 inches taller than me.. It is not impossible to win, but you are in a natural disadvantage..

 

Not sure about that. Ali always struggled against defensive boxers: Jones, Norton, Young... Chris Byrd would give him a good fight.

 

Man we think alike. :good

 

It's a very interesting debate JG.

On the one hand, it's clear that every sport has evolved. Evidenced by crashing world records, better physical specimens and greater gym/dietary techniques.

However, Boxing can claim to be exempt from this on the basis that their fights are regulated by weight classes. Thus whilst the size of a Prop in Rugby or Running Back in NFL has obviously gotten bigger, a 147 lber is a 147lber in 1900 or 2050......

The exemption to this would of course be the HW division, and this is a very subjective debate. Whilst it's clear that size is having an impact in the division, I consider it un-arguable that the skill level has dropped.

But the 4 great SHW fighters have struggled with smaller men on occasion. Throughout his HW career, Holyfield showed that he could overcome bigger men (Bowe 2 a prime example) and he was no bigger than many of the 60's/70's HW's. Is there an argument that Dempsey, Marciano, Tunney et al would struggle with the modern SHW's......of course. These guys would be CW's in todays world so there is a strong argument that they would be too small.

The Foreman factor is interesting. Given that an ancient, very far removed from prime George was not only able to win the HW championship, but give modern great Evander a hell of a night....this is surely indicative of the fact that prime George and the rest of the 1970's greats would not have been out of their depth in the modern era??

Boxing of course doesn't work like this but no one can guarantee that the Tyson who lost to Holy (albeit removed from his best), would "crush" the Ali who beat Foreman. Especially as ancient Foreman gave the Tyson conqueror a very tough night!!

Sometimes I wonder if boxing is too condition focused now with less emphasis on skill. In recent years, the likes of James Toney have exhibited perfectly that even when not in 100% shape, a high skill level can make up for these deficiencies to some extent.

There is no right answer of course, and even those that do not believe "old-time" fighters could survive in modern boxing have to appreciate greatness in its time. Pele is no less appreciated because he couldn't get into Utd's team now.

 

That'll be Dempsey.

 

"""""with better defensive, subtle moves like feints, fighters sticking and moving to win points, rather then trying to trade because they are not sure if they could make it through 15 rounds, better corners and cut men,."""""""""..
Agree with the cut men...only with the adrenaline mixture which they did not have back in the real old days.
I doubt if the corners are better.
You didn't mention parring a punch.....and yes, feinting has been a part of boxing since the day it started. Read up on Gans.
I see a whole lot of modern fighters who don't have a jab, much less hook off the jab, or got a nice long classic hook. Don't know what a side step is, how to spin a fighter and how to in-fight.


There were so many gyms. Such a deep talent pool. The Old Guys complained of the shallow talent pool even then in the late '50's. They blamed TV for throwing good prospects to the wolves too soon. When I was young in '60, old guys told me; 28 was old for a lighter weight fighter, 30 for one in the middle and 32-33 was old for a heavy.
Joe Louis was an Old Man at age 36....
Liston lied about his age, in no one was willing to bet on an old man....Moore lied about his age too.

It has to do with reflex...and you could not like now go on the old champ circuit. Look at Tennis, at 32-33 max, all dominate tennis players stop being dominate, they become only dangerous might make the quarters of the Open, not will be a lock for the final.

The K-brothers are real old even the 36 year old one....where are the 22 year old Louis's, the 22 year old Patterson's, the 22 year old Clay/Ali, Frazier or Tyson's.

The talent pool is so thin, Briggs is still getting good fights. Holy is going to get a fight.



There was Ring Mag's single line of contenders who had to battle each other to advance and challenge the one and only champion. Not like today, picking what splinter champion you can beat.

The fighters had to be active in they were not paid the fortune to sit around on their bruised ego should they lose a fight vs a good man. One went out and got another fight quickly so one would not be yesterday's news. When good men fought good hard fights and lost, it was not the end of the world it is now, as long as it was a good fight.
Unlike today there were no haters back then. Not like today.

It was expected. When a One and Only Champ reached down to number six contender he was taking a tune up fight...a keep busy fight. He was expected to beat him The real challengers were those 5 and up.
Today that # 6 guy is often rated number 1 or 2 in the belt factory in the top four are splinter champs.So you see a lot of splinter champs fighting mandatory contenders and not mandatory challengers.

Fighters went to fights to watch fighters they might or wanted to face. In that a fighter was fighting 6 or 8 times a year, there was a chance he'd be fighting close enough to get there. Tunny stalked McCoy picking up tricks until he'd improved enough to take him...or McCoy grew past prime.

Muscles.....no big biceps wanted, no weight lifting chest wanted. That causes the Chicken wing Jab Telegraphing the left.
Look at shrunken chest Tunny, then look at his back. Not an extra oz. of BS muscle to be seen.
There were many well built boxers...none with useless chests like Haye.

Those who could afford a training camp chopped a lot of wood...got for the back and lats, and wrists and forearms. Ran the same as today.

The Rock was a condition machine...he even ran his 8-10 miles on Christmas day. He practiced nose deep in a swimming pool...to bad they didn't have a snorkel back then. It smoothed out his punching. He did carbohydrate packing. .... back when they weighed in at 12 on the day of the fight. He'd eat a plate of spaghetti about two, and then take a two hour nap.
He was too cheap to spend a nickel on a subway and would walk 100 blocks when in NY.
Well having won his first fight, he who started real late in boxing, celebrated. He woke up sore and broke the next morning. He decided not to buy any drinks back after that.
He came in once at 188-9 and complained about being slow and sluggish....at that time he was coming in at 186, his fighting weight...having the power he wanted speed, three minute 100% no rest endurance, the whole fight long. He gave them no time for an air break.

Gloves were smaller and harder back then....I believe.

Weight...8 weight classes were huge...now they are 16....so you did not have to be at the edge of it, but it helped. Your best fighting weight....Billy Conn liked being at 168 for Lt. Heavy.
Unlike today when you feel like it you go up 5 pounds to the next weight....the next weight up had real Big Guys in it.

Fitzsimmons, Armstrong, Mickey Walker, Robinson, Basilio, Griffith, and Dick Tiger...One and Only Undisputed Champion of the World in two or three 'real' weight divisions.

I don't count any splinter champs who never had all the belts including Lenard or Jones.


By the way, everyone who ever fought Marciano, said he looked so easy to hit and was hard to hit. And Charles was one of the Greatest Lt. Heavies and best heavies of his day said so..... He and Walcott* were masters.

Lewis had nice little draw them in tricks. His corner was Blackburn, once number 3 Lightweight in the world for quite a while.

Where am I supposed to stop...the '50? or the 60s?
Fighters who could show the modern boys all the tricks in the world and fight often.


The original Joe Walcott...Gans

Ken Buchannan, Paul Pender
Hogan Kid Bassey

Sammy Angott 5'-6" Lightweight champ once fought Ray Robinson, the crowd thought Anggott robbed. Robinson was at 5'11" a giant welter. (The Hearns of his day)..only fought one guy near his height at 5'10".

James Carter....Ismmeal Lnguna, Ike Williams, Saxon, The De Marco brothers.
Tunny, Loughran, Conn.
Don't think Philadelphia Jack O'Brien didn't know all the tricks and more.

Rough tough little Mickey Walker Welter and Middleweight champ....so he'd only beat up Cruisers today; not the good heavies he used to beat up. Out side the Brits nobody can in-fight any more.

Got lots of 'boxers today who can't jab their way out of a paper bag and don't go to the body.

 

Didn't an old, fat, shot to **** George Foreman beat the crap out of Michael Moorer?

Isn't a 46 year old past prime Hopkins the lineal light heavyweight champion?

Marciano would beat Wlad Klitschko as far as I'm concerned.

And SRR would beat anyone from WW to MW.



Imagine how bad Marciano would murder Adamek, who is Vitali's next foe.

 

the ****? are you nuts?

 

Physiological barriers.

The 4 minute mile.....well some Pawnee was timed on the prairie not on a track at 3.56 in 1876.
I watched Perry chase 60 feet with the shot put for years. Dallas Long threw 60, and on his very next throw so did Perry. Real soon it was 65 then some one threw 70 inside a decade. And they had fiddled around with 58-59-60 for ages.

Shoes are much better than back in the saw dust days. I remember the 7 foot high jump...it was a real big deal in '56 and big 7-4 in '60- 7'6" in 64...and that was huge in my mind. took ages before some one jumped high again. in 1978 7 foot 9. then 8 feet in 93.

There are men like Moses and Sotomayor...high jumping I think it's 2.40 + (8 foot or just about)Three have done it more than once, Thanhart X 2, Sjoberg 4X and Sotomayor 24 X.

Now explain why it took 15 years to break a record that has now stood 20? When all the modern stuff is so much better always.




Shoes and tracks are much better today....lots nice landing in an air bag than a pile of sawdust high jumping or pole vaulting.
Training is much better today...there sure is a lot more money in it...it's not 'amateur' of the old days.

Yes Chamberlain could play today, he was coordinated. Robertson could play too. He'd be real hard to defend against with that sneaky lay up.

 

Also haven't boxers taken illegal PED's and still lost, showing that being a slightly better physical specimen doesn't neccessarily mean you win the fight or are a better boxer?

 

It's always the way man. In Wales it is the players of the "Golden Era" of Welsh rugby which get the old timers' knickers all moist. An era of 5 decades ago when the game was amateur, and these players (talented though they undoubtedly were) are supposed to be superior to players who commit their whole life to the sport and are physically stronger, faster, better conditioned with improved facilities, improved diets, etc etc etc.

 

Bingo. That is the only argument that new age advocates use. Athleticism, despite the fact that great athletes are usually born, and in the case of boxing the general talent pool has dwindled so considerably over the past 20 or so years that as a result the minor advantages in "training methods" would only serve to keep them on a par (at best) with their past counterparts in terms of sheer athleticism and physicality.

The bottom line is this: boxing is a cognitive sport above all. One which relies on adjustments on the fly, constant reflex and reaction (and by reflex and I don't mean fast-twitch muscle fibers, I mean knowing how to react quickly to a given situation through tuned in experience), mental fortitude, experience, etc.

How many specific fights that prove the above paragraph's points do I need to use as examples for people to get the point?