How were old timers so good?

/close thread.

But nevertheless there are great fighters out there who match the fighters of the past. Mayweather, Pac ... perhaps Wlad, Ward and Marquez.

 

don't worry there can be some insensitive ignorant people on these boards, but most are just fine.

choose the higher ground and don't meet ignorance with ignorance. you'll also find that the magority of the ignorant ones are english, pay no heed to that either, it's just the beautiful british way.

 

Location: Russia

Nuff' said.

 

I do look for it. I watch as much boxing from nowadays as I do from any era. Your point about average fighters is not the one I'm making. I'm not saying old time trainers could make the average man 'great'.

It is a less competitive era nowadays and 'achievement' is easier to come by. Is Ricky Burns' 'two weight championship' as impressive as Harry Jeffra's? Is Nonito Donaire's weight jumping as impressive as Harada's? Is Floyd Mayweather a technical wizard fighting lots of distinctly untechnical guys?

Would Jim Jeffries beat the best cruiserweights today? No, probably not. I agree it's not black and White (no pun intended) and no era is infallible. But boxing is pretty weak right now from a fans point of view.

And I don't agree with Carlos Ortiz there was a massive drop off in ability between him and Duran either. Yes, I'm aware everyone has said there's been a lowering in standards from era to era and it's nothing new. But I do think it's a fair appraisal nowadays.

 

Not nuff said. Senya is an old school historian.

 

ok

 

This is a terrible post. Marvis beat Bonecrusher who was a later titlist. It was Joe's fault Marvis failed ecause he tried to make him fight like he did.

There's no logic here. This is a pathetic speculative punt.

 

It really is simple the diversification of weight categories combined with a much smaller talent pool allows for the good boxers to avoid each other much more easily. As a general rule they do not fight as high a quality of fighter as often.

As has been mentioned boxing as we know it has been around since late 1800's and most agree that from a technical standpoint 1890's-1910 has very few "top" fighters they are great in achievement Fitzsimmons middle-heavy etc but probably short on HTH ability.

The transition period from 1910-1920 as boxing became more popular and legalised a better class of fighter emerges. From 1920-1950 when boxing was most popular and fighters fought at the top level much more frequently than today we get the majority of our greats Its no coincidence they were fighting more often against a better class of opponent with more refined styles than earlier counterparts.

It then reached a plateu with from 50-late 70's with the status quo producing good fighters and fights though fighters fought less. then from the late 70's onwards with the proliferation in belts and weight classes as well as a more cautious money driven approach of protection and with the advent of PPV there has been a gradual decline to modern day.

Now we have good athletes who fight less often in more weights against a lower class of opponent......no brainer they are going to be worse.