Look let's be realistic here. Wlad/Vitali/Lewis would dominate any era of HW boxing

See above.

 

Explain how boxing as a whole has progressed. What techniques,what training methods etc have made them superior fighters to the past then give evidence that these methods work and why I should believe you. For example, How do you punch harder and how do you prove this? Statistics don't provide enough evidence. How do we get fast? How do we get better balance and so on, and then of course the obvious if boxing is progressing, the fighters should be faster,stronger,YOUNGER like in every other sport but the age keeps going up and up.

Yea but I never claimed to be a intelligent super being like you now did I dickhead?

 

why didn't the klits fight golota, ruiz or oquendo?

 

There, I actually decided to treat you with respect this time, in the hopes maybe, just maybe, you'll actually read it seriously and change your mind just a little.

 

You really exposed yourself as the idiot savant.

That word again is creeping in "anecdotal". I asked for evidence not "anecdotal evidence" so you have sorta feel sorry for you.

The style thing is laughable.

You can't move like Ali because the fighters are too big,not fit enough,you need awesome balance to move like Ali,nothing more not that they figured it out. Larry Holmes fought like Ali in the 90's and won? but according to you they caught on to his style in the early 80s hell he never changed his style in the 80s and reigned as champion for years..I feel sorry for you I really do. That analysis was a good laugh and like I said earlier proved nothing.

Loudon can respond to that I gotta go

 

Just a hopeless dumbass. I will never treat you as an adult again, you've proven once and for all you can't handle it.

 

yea thats it and sure Holmes was.

Thanks for the laugh man, the one thing that really cracked me up was "and in fact it started to be less effective later in his career" because no other factors come into play just they figured him out,that was the best part.. it was great

anyway great laugh,exposed yourself,don't know a thing about boxing and you cannot provide anything factual towards what you're saying...sorry I had to write(or is it right?) but gotta scoot

 

This all falls under #'s 4 and 5 of "common responses". But, yeah, you are one dumb little boy.

 

Anyway you slice it, you have absolutely no rational argument. They all fall into the "common response" segments where I have detailed their failures in depth.

 

That bit makes me laugh..we're talking boxing right..Wanna give me a more in depth response? or don't you wanna make a fool of yourself again

 

you're a idiot savant, you even understand the word rational??

Wladimir Klitschko Age 37
Vitali Klitschko Age 41
Floyd Mayweather jr Age 36
Guillermo Rigondeaux Age 32
Bernard Hopkins Age 49

Want to name another sport where you require speed,power,experience,balance,timing etc and the champions seem to get older and older? because I can't

Lebrons 28?
Kobe 32?
Dwayne Wade 30?

No 49 champion who competing against younger more "progressed" atheletes..only in your head

 

those common reponses you made up? here ones

common reponse to people like andrewa

'knowledge on the sport' these people don't understand boxing is more mental then it is physical therefore they dont understand boxing at all,their argument is he is in denial,he nostalgic,but in reality there is no winning argument so the rational conclusion is fighters of the past can more then compete of the fighters today.

 

We're done mate, just leave it.

You had your chance. Whenever I've got time on my hands, one of the first things I do, is to come on here. I would gladly have debated with you for hours on end.

But there's no point.

You've had FOUR answers to your points, and they've been objective, and have contained logic and facts. But like a mardy little girl, you've just copied your post over and over.

You've copied it nearly 20 times.

You'll end up getting banned.

Why do the same 3 to 4 people need to see your response 20 times?

Give yourself a pat on the back for ruining the thread.

Don't even bother replying to this, because I won't reply back.

But just before I go, it was YOU who said that boxing has evolved. You didn't say just HW's, you said Boxing. What are you talking about, saying that I asked you questions on modern guys? Ray Robinson's peak was in the 40's, Duran's peak was in the 70's, and Ray and Tommy's peak were the 80's, which were 30 years ago. Anyway, it doesn't matter now.

It's a real shame the way you've behaved.

 

glover,

I believe that Mike at his absolute best, would have knocked out Wlad and Lewis. I think Vitali would have been the hardest one of the three for Mike to fight. You say that a boxer-puncher spelt doom for Frazier, but he brought relentless pressure, like most of today's guys have never seen. I'm certain that Frazier would cause problems for today's top ten.

Nothing ever trumps styles make fights. Put Tyson Fury in with Frazier. He's never come across anyone as tough. Frazier wouldn't take a backward step, and he would have stalked him and just kept coming forward throwing to the body. Psychology can play a huge role in the outcome of the fight. I've picked Fury as an example because of the huge size difference. Joe would have stared him down and wouldn't have had a care in the world. As the rounds went on, how would Fury have coped? It's the same with Marciano. Fury would have huge physical gifts, but he'd have to knock Rocky unconscious to Keep him at bay. I've seen John McDermott pressure Fury, and there's lots of people that think McDermott was robbed in that first fight, me included. How much as Fury improved since then? We don't know, because he hasn't really fought any great fighters. I think Frazier is a much tougher and all-around better fighter than Chisora.

The reason you don't see Mike as having a disadvantage is because he was so good and fast. I'm referring to physical disadvantages. Height, reach, weight. A lot of his opponents must have been heavier than 220 pounds, and taller than 5'10.

Ali's footwork, that included timing and balance, and his hand speed, reflexes and overall skills could overcome a 3 inch height disadvantage and a few pounds in weight.

This is why I keep repeating that styles make fights.

You put a smaller HW in with Wlad, but who isn't particularly fast or skilled, then Wlad's size and weight is going to be a huge ADVANTAGE for him.

But put him with someone smaller, but who is far quicker and more skilled like Ali, then suddenly his size works AGAINST him. All of a sudden, he's at a disadvantage, because he's not as quick as his opponent, and he would be struggling to land.

It's hard to say, but there will always be exceptions. But you originally said that HW's of the past wouldn't be able to even compete with today's guys, which is complete nonsense.

1. That's fine, and that's your opinion which you're entitled to.

2. But take the elite guys like the K's and Haye out of today's group of HW's, and you haven't got much left have you?

Would Povetkin, Chisora, Arreola, Sollis, Peter, Adamek, have beaten Norton, Liston, Shavers, Lyle, Quarry, Chuvalo, Patterson etc? (I've picked Liston, Patterson and Norton, because I know that you don't rate them)

I don't think you could say yes with any conviction.

Which examples?

I think that an early 80's Holmes would have had a fair chance of beating all three guys.

 

glover,

Fair enough, but either way you're wrong. Ha!

That's true regarding Mike, but we both know that they were other factors involved. He went off the rails. He was never 100% dedicated after Spinks, and especially after prison. No head movement, just looking for the one big shot etc. He was surrounded by hangers on, half heartedly training etc.

Ha! Ali would easily have beaten Fury in my opinion. I don't get your comparison on Ali from the 60's and 70's. The 60's version up on his toes, would have bewildered Fury. Fury wouldn't have landed anything. But the 70's version that was heavier, slower, without the same footwork, would have been much easier for Fury to hit. Either way, Ali definitely wins before 76 in my opinion.

Yes, styles make fights. Look at Frazier/Foreman/Ali. Big George would always have destroyed Frazier. But Ali, even a 25 year old version, would always have had more trouble with Frazier than Foreman in my opinion.

I think skills have digressed as a whole. Old school techniques have been lost, and fighters don't fight as often, and don't seem to be as fit or as dedicated.

There's hundreds of examples to use.

If you look at the WW's today, would any of them have beaten SRR or SRL? You may think so, but I don't.

Which modern day LW could beat Duran?

Which modern day LMW could have beaten Hearns or Mike McCallum?

Would any of today's MW's have beaten Monzon or Hagler?

Not just today's guys, but guys of the last 20-30 years?

Would any of today's LHW's have beaten Spinks or Foster?

Even if you base it on H2H instead of accomplishments, I don't see how fighters overall have gotten better.

He didn't weigh that in the late 60's. The Ali that weighed 230 pounds took severe punishment.

Lets see Haye overcome the same adversities as Ali. He's already retired once, and he's only had 6 fights at the weight. His best win is probably Valuev and that was controversial. Also, he's only had 28 fights.

A 25 year old Ali was the complete package.

Tyson Fury wouldn't have known what the hell was happening to him. Chisora wouldn't be able to get near him either. A peak Ali would have been around 20 pounds over the CW limit.