Why should we care about "Classic" boxing history?

Seamus & Red Cobra :thumbsup

also two men, one against the other, the best (even if it was just on the day), to come out the victor... great appeal to men (and some women), no matter the social class or character.

Especially when Boxing was BIG, and for my money BETTER - "the History!!!"

 

Precisely !!

 

Same reasons we might care about any kind of history.

Movies, politics, economics, wars...

It provides context in which to place the present, draw comparisons, measure progress etc.

And it provides some cracking good tales of some right colourful characters.




And of course, it provides the fodder for many great discussions, arguments, feuds, and obsessions right here on this forum.

 

Probably shouldnt, it only makes modern day boxing that more depressing. :|

 

a man with one eye on the past only sees the future with one eye.
a man with no eyes on the past is blind.

it goes something like that.

 

I love this post.

 

To better understand the sport and what it means to reach the pinnacle.

Although mainly it's for statistical freaks like me to compile lists and try to invent formulae :good

 

It suffers pretty much in comparison.

 

There is a massive archive of great fights and fighters to watch. It's much easier to dip into than to wait for a fight to be made nowadays.

For me, to get a good grip on modern boxing I'm glad to be interested in 'classic' stuff, it gives me a point of comparison. I used to think joke fights were good fights. With more of a grasp on history, I'm far less likely to take what I'm given at face value anymore, and thus my appreciation/hatred of the modern game has also come on leaps and bounds.

Lot of interesting stuff out there, that's why I like to learn more and more about the fighters and scenes of the past.

 

The bourbon was waxing profound.

 

You're absolutely right, and indeed NO sport could survive if it confined itself to just people who were interested in having an in-depth historical understanding of the sport. Indeed, there are very few fields of inquiry that could survive were this the case. Let me give you a personal example. I teach in a particular social science discipline, and am an expert in the history of that discipline. However, the vast majority of my colleagues, who are experts in other areas of the discipline, know little or nothing about that history, beyond the "basics.". It doesn't mean they are somehow less adequate scholars or teachers, it's just not their area of interest or expertise.

As a boxing fan, I know a fair amount of boxing history. But there are certainly those who know much more than I, and those who know far, far less. Others may know more about boxing technique or strategy. If we have an interest in the sport and want to watch boxing, we are all boxing fans, and all necessary to the health of the sport. Including those who know little or no boxing history.

 

It really was a brilliant post. Maybe I'll ditch the :smoke and pick up the bottle instead.

 

Because as a modernist I'd say the best trainers have left the sport (or died) and many of the best practisioners and trainers were doing their best work in the 40s-90s - not that all fighters between this period are better

Still for me, nothing like the thrill of a live fight, old fights can't compare in that respect

 

My thoughts exactly....I agree 100%...

 

This is true. I mainly get my live thrills from MMA nowadays, never get too psyched up for boxing as of late, it happens, but rarely.