Myth: champs of the past wouldn't be champs if USSR had been able to compete

After we will see Rigodeaux vs Donaire / Mares we can have an answer. (IF this fight will happen , of course )

Rigo has by far the most accomplished amateur boxing career but I think Donaire would K.O him. :yep

 

I have to agree with this. Being really successful in amateur boxing does not guarantee success in the professional ranks

 

I don't think anyone says Ali would be a journeyman. He was an olympic gold medallist.
But are you really saying that;
Russia
Ukraine
Poland
Romania
Hungary
Bulgaria
and East Germany etc could not have produced any world champions?

Of course the divisions would have looked very different if all of the best boxing nations were competing. USA would have been the strongest nation, with the most world champions, but most world champions would not have been american.

 

Well of course it doesn't. But is unusual for a really successful pro to not have been a good amateur.
Is it so hard to believe that a eastern bloc amateur such as Jerzy Kulej, a two time olympic gold medallist could not have been a world champion in the 60s?

 

Sorry, but how do you see it? After hearing that Berlin wall is down on tv fighters would buy ticket to America and fight for HW title the next day?
EE fighters started getting into the mix in late 90s and early 2000nds and it took them years to get to top. It's not fair to count from the same second when Berlin wall came down.
Zolkin was an early bird. He was picked as an experiment from a boxing club in St. Petersburg along with a couple of other fighters. However, everybody else needed a lot more time to turn pro and get to top level.

 

Great Thread!thumbsup

Agree 100% and the reason these Eastern Euros are dominatin bigger weight classes today is because Americans are playing ball.
But it is about to chance! This man is gonna bring the titles back home. Man look at his muscles what a bad ass fine athlete!

This content is protected

Man these Eastern Euros about to getting fuked up soon.:deal Seth is the huge athletic guy who used to rule hw's before Americans started to play ball and werent interested about boxing anymore.

 

the first EE fighters did bad professionally because they didn't have good management/money/camps. Maskaev, for example, fought Mccall in his 4rth fight. Mccall just before that KOed Lewis.

 

1) It was easier for lighter weight fighters to get breaks than heavyweights, because their were more global opportunities to develop. Producing great pro heavyweights was something we (the U.S.) had a monopoly on because our trainers and promoters had all the experience in handling the top heavyweight talent. The ex-Soviet bloc guys were frequently just brought in as opponents, such as Maskaev getting fed to McCall and Tua in his first dozen fights. There was a drastic shortage of world-level professional trainers because, under communism, there was no need for them.

2)Interesting fact on the Olympic thing, although useless stats are a guilty pleasure of mine.

 

Pretty clear to see your motivation for opening this thread . Try not to be so bitter .

 

Good point.

I see many (US) fans continue to have their undies in knots b/c they no longer dominate the HW div and boxing in general like in the past.

Just read a few posts and see the "big US athletes are playing other sports excuse" :-( When Marciano, Liston, Ali, etc were HW champs there were big men (relative) playing in team sports like football & hoops. Why don't we say that there were athletes then that could have defeated <name your champ>? Of course that's possible, but also a lame argument. If it's so easy why don't some of those big guys - any era - train and try to become the HW champ?

There are many 1000s of big, athletic US men who will never make it into the majors of team sports. Why can't the US produce even 10 serious HW contenders? The RING top 10 HW (plus champ WK) rankings are almost all Euros (most from former Soviet block). But if they were competing generations ago, it's a "myth" they'd have much of an impact? :nut
What the OP did was state a poor hypothesis.

Here's a myth - that 70s US HWs could compete in todays HW div. :yep

There are other, more complex reasons for the decline of US boxing fortunes. But most fans don't want to face them.

 

Let's establish some common ground and see where we can all agree.

1) Ordinary fighters don't win multiple gold medals. Now does anyone disagree with that statement?

 

US has the most world champs. Next closest is Mexico. Says it all. Boxing is and will continue to be about the North American continent

 

North America vs Europe

NORTH AMERICAN BELT HOLDERS

USA- 19
Mexico - 13
Cuba - 2
Panama - 1
Puerto Rico - 1

EUROPEAN BELT HOLDERS

Ukraine - 4
England 3
Russia - 2
Poland - 1
Germany - 1



Honestly is there really any doubt what side of the world dominates boxing?

 

Used to be more lop sided. The trend is changing :think

Also is you weight (pardon the pun) the bigger div's more - like HW - which most all US fans did b4 the US lost it grip on the HW title, the trend is clearly moving in the other direction.

I mean how many casual (and even some serious) boxing fans give a rats ass about the feather wt or light welter champ?
Ans - very, very few. It takes a lighter fighter like Pac to have some cross over appeal to the casual fan.