Have boxing skills progressed, or have they regressed?

Ok, fair enough. That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it.


So you think that today's WW's, MW's, LHW's, LW's and LMW's etc, are the best ever?


You're saying that Martinez is the best MW ever?

That Hopkins is the best LHW ever?

That Mayweather is the best WW ever?

That Alvarez is the best LMW ever?

That Wlad Klitschko is the best HW ever?

 

Tommo,

The basics of boxing are taught in any gym. But I watch tons of old fights from all weight classes, and I don't see fighters today having better footwork and throwing the same types of shots. Merry-go-rounding? Ha! Are you sure you've boxed? Footwork is one of the most important tools for a boxer. Slipping, feinting, timing, making a guy off balance, and countering etc, all come from having great footwork. Defensive masters of the past, all had unbelievable footwork. The uppercut seems to be the rarest of all punches today when I watch fights, and I don't seem to see as much blocking and parrying. The best fighter in the world today is Floyd Mayweather, and he uses old school techniques.

I'm referring to stamina across every weight class. With regards to HW's, they had huge HW's of the past, and they were still fit. They fought a lot more frequently. Weight is only a decisive attribute, if both fighters are evenly matched, otherwise, all-around skills and speed will be the deciding factor.

Yes, but most of the old time trainers have gone, and fighters don't fight as often, so don't pick up things as quick as fighters of the past. You learn something new each time you fight, and you encounter more styles etc. I agree that circumstances have changed, and money is a huge factor. Today guys can fight two to 3 times a year, and make millions of pounds. They don't have to fight every month like in the past.

Rubbish?

Pac? At what weight? Green and Mundine would be near the top?

So you're telling me, that no HW pre 1960, could crack anything but journeyman? Ha!

So Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Marciano,Charles, and Walcott would have NO CHANCE against ANY of today's top 20 guys? None whatsoever?

We're not discussing how popular boxing is, we're discussing if there's been a decline in a fighters overall skillset.

As above. Nobody is disputing that Boxing is now huge, with lots of fighters.

But are today's guys as good technically, as fighters from the past?

Lets name the best top 5-10 fighters from any weight class of your choice.

We'll see how many modern guys make the list.

 

rusak,

Why does it go against common sense?

Nutbag propaganda?

I don't know how much boxing you watch, and how big a fan you are, but how many fighters today do you see going to the body and throwing uppercuts? There doesn't seem to be much bobbing and weaving, and blocking and parrying, fighters fighting their way out of clinches etc.

Can you see many of today's fighters studying old school techniques, like Tyson did with Cus every night for hours on end?

I'm sure that if you asked any knowledgeable fan to name their top 20, 30 or 50 fighters of all time, there'd be more fighters from the past, than the present.

Pick the top 5-10 guys of all time, from any weight class of your choice, and see how many modern guys make the list.

They lived in the gym, and fought every month. I agree that after a certain period of time, fighters had fought too many fights. But it works both ways, because the more often you fight, the more you learn. You sharpen your skills by being active, and you stay in better condition, much more than you would just by fighting two to three times a year.

If you don't agree with what I've said, that's fine. I respect your opinion. The proof to me, is all on film.


Would any to today's WW's beat SRL, Hearns or SRR?

Would any of today's MW's beat Hagler and Monzon?

Would any of today's LW's beat Benny Leonard or Roberto Duran?

Would any of today's LHW's beat Spinks or Foster etc?

Would any of today's LMW's beat Hearns and McCallum?


I think the majority of the best fighters across all weights, are fighters of the past.


If skills have progressed, and fighters are getting better each year, then surely today's MW's are be the best MW's of all time?


Surely the current crop of LHW's are the best LHW's to date?


In my opinion, sports science and technology have improved, but techniques and skills haven't as a whole.


Ray Robinson is till considered the best fighter ever, not just by old timers, but by knowledgeable fans in general, and yet his peak was 70 years ago.

 

I've actually edited my title, to be more specific.

We are having boxing booms. There's lots of exciting fighters, and the sport is as popular as ever, and is huge across the globe.

But I'm not asking if boxing is popular, I want to know if you think skills and techniques have progressed or regressed?

Do today's fighters have more skills as a whole, than fighters of the past?

 

That's a very poor analogy, because you can't compare a fighter to a basketball player.

There's a world of difference!

So if someone said to you "I think Ray Robinson who fought 70 years ago, would clear out today's Welterweight division" you'd laugh at them, and they'd be humiliated?

I don't think so!