Why were many old time boxers so scrawny looking

Picture quality.

many pictures are much less sharp, then you'll see some that are obviously of much better quality and the fighters fitness and 'definition' becomes just as clear.

Like Film Footage it is poor quality, not poor fighters!

 

Genetics dictated more in the old days if you know what i mean.

 

fighters fought at in & around their natural weight basically, busy, busy scheduals kept them fit & active, mostly in catchweight contests and then coming down to the championship weight when involved in titles or eliminators for said weights.

 

They just plainly weren't yoked. Today's fighters are much more yoked...ergo much better. Just compare...

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Dat HGH...

 

You're not wrong.....

This content is protected

This content is protected

It's irrefutable.

 

Don't get the conclusion, S. Why does it make them better? Benny Leonard who was painfully thin -- without any muscles or yoke -- flattened most every muscled bad ass to face him.

What you look like in the mirror has nothing to do with how well you can fight.

 

I think it has a lot to do with the emphasis on running in training. Look at the Chris Byrd vs Shane George fight to see how some of the modern heavyweights would look if they trained the way the earlier fighters did. Whether this is an advantage or not, i guess the jury is still out, as Byrd never went too well in that fight (although age might have also been a factor).

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

It is actually a very good question.

The answer is that they came from a different place, and were going to a different place.

A fighter back then likely came into boxing malnourished, while a modern boxer likely comes in needing to cut some excess body fat.

A fighter back then focused on stamina training primarily, while a modern fighter takes a more multi faceted training programme.