But they've the disadvantage that those techniques are use being used to get them back into shape after a four five month layoff.
quite possible the worst post ive ever read on this forum You ever here the phrase practice makes perfect ? well its true the more you practice something the better you become. So unlike modern boxers who fight two or three times a year the old timers fought two or three times a month and with that where training all the time because back then boxing was a proffession like any other nine to five job, todays fighters fight and take two to three months off. And all this talk about how science has devolped well what science are you talking about ? PED'S ? sure thats about it, boxing gyms today look the same as they allways did, a heavy bag is a heavy bag and a speed ball is a speed ball Probabley the thing that has advanced besides PED'S is nutrition and that is used by todays fighter to make weight because there all out of shape fat ****s the old timers were'nt because they were allways training and fighting they didnt have time to get out of shape
Did he have specific strength/conditioning coaches, nutritionists, cryotherapy chambers, etc? How come boxers like Dempsey and Liston who were both approx 6'1 were considered big heavyweights for their time, now there are lots of 6'4 plus heavyweights? 'drank pure water...breathed fresh air...and ate fresh foods' - Did they eat lightning and crap thunder too? What do you think today's boxers eat and drink, stale food, unpure water?
Re: the heavyweights The only major difference between then and now is the advent of performance enhancing drugs, which probably came into mainstream use back in the 1980s/early 90s (this is also the time, incidentally, when we started to see a large number of extremely explosive heavyweights emerging on the scene, Tyson, Morrison, Tua etc). Aside from that there really haven't been any big changes that I can see, at least not ones that are routinely used by a majority of fighters. Sure a guy like Wlad uses scientifically developed training techniques, has his own personal chef, and a doctor's background in sports science, but he's one man amidst a sea of out-of-shape blobs and over-muscled punchbags. He's simply not representative of the division as a whole. Skill-wise, modern fighters are more advanced in some ways and less advanced in others. It's very hard to quantify, since skill doesn't exist in a vacuum but as a response to the environment you're fighting in: an era with a high number of good in-fighters will force you to develop your in-fighting ability etc. Saying that, certain judgements can be inferred by watching and comparing video footage of fights. I would not at any stage call Max Baer's free swinging haymaker fests skillful displays of pugilism for instance, regardless of the era he fought in.
If you really like to make a case of modern-day boxing being different from the past, then that means we're probably talking about the early 1900's right? Not around the 50's and beyond. I mean, if the training methods from back then were completely different from today, then that just means the methods of classic trainers like Georgie Benton, Eddie Futch, Angelo Dundee, and Cus d' Amato among others would have been obsolete. But no, they've been teaching the intricacies of the sport back then. They teach boxers the proper way to feint, throw a cross, jab, duck under and sidestep.
You ever hear of the Dempsey roll ? Yeah he invented that **** Now what piece of magnificent skill did Chris ****ing Byrd create ?
If Wladamir Klitchsko was crawling on the ground in his first fight with Lamon Brewster, I have a hunch Joe Frazier might have had a chance as well.