Having read may different opinions and threads on this forum and others it always seems that people rate current fighters much lower than previous generations of boxers. However if you look back at the eras and fighters that get rated so highly many of them were not so highly rated when they were active or just finished their career. Back when Marciano was active many boxing 'experts' ranked previous heavyweight champs above him like Jim Corbett, Bob Fitzsimmons, John L Sullivan and Jim Jeffries. Most of those guys drew the colour line in there fights and had very simply styles that Marciano even though pretty basic fighter himself would have exploited. These days the majority of people would pick Marciano over these old timers but back then most picked them over Marciano. I came across by accident an old thread on this forum which had a 1975 Ring magazine ranking of the 10 greatest heavyweights. Even in 1975 when Ali was active 3 of these old timers with very basic skills (in comparison to fighters from the 1950's onwards) were ranked ahead of Ali. The 1975 List Joe Louis Jack Dempsey Jim Jeffries Jack Johnson Rocky Marciano Gene Tunney Bob Fitzsimmons Jim Corbett Ali Frazier Marciano was probably ranked higher than when he was active and Joe Louis I believe was looked upon like Ali is now the best of the best. But guys like Fitzsimmons , Corbett, Jeffries or Tunney would not make a lot of people's top tens now days. Also when Holmes was in his prime he was not well regarded yet now people look upon him as one of the three or five greatest heavyweights ever. And he is often picked (myself included) as one of the very few heavyweights who could have a 50- 50 chance or close chance of winning against a prime Ali. Yet people were very unhappy with him as champion just like how people are unhappy with Vitali and Wlad. Funny how lots of White Americans wanted Holmes to lose to a white contender like Cooney now they have two white Champions at heavyweight and are even more unhappy than the fans in 1982 were with Holmes, guess they have to be white Americans!. I think if Vitali and Wlad had come along in the 80's (if the Soviets allowed pro boxing) it would have been really exciting having two huge soviet fighters taking on a mature Holmes or young Tyson esp if it had happened right after Rocky 4 came out! So it does appear that many fighters have to age like a good wine before they get appreciated. Maybe Tyson is the exception so feared during his prime that people picked him and Ali as the most exciting HW matchup but now many people are questioning how good he really was even in his prime. Sorry for such a long first post but I think it is an interesting subject
It is an intresting subject, welcome to the forum.:good It is a time honoured tradition for boxing fans to dismiss what they have and look into the past. This is why its only worth making comparisons once a fighter has been well and truly retired and the whole body of work can assesed within its time scale for dominance of era and impact on history. Historically journalists were further away from actual boxing people than they are now. With film more availible it is easier to study than rely on memory or base an opinion on artisic licence when old time writers guilded the lily and reported on more than one sport. Much film was not availible to study until the late 1960s. videos were new in the 1970s but the records and eye witness stuff has always been around. Mostly you have to respect the eye witness stuff of boxing people together with film, records and an understanding of the history and boxing landscape of each era. In my lifetime the only champion that boxing people were universally sold on at the time he was curent was mike Tyson. 1950s magazines held high regard of Marciano. He was inexplicably rated over Louis but below Dempsey as an all timer. Ali was bigger in the weakest part of his career, the 1970s than he had been in thec1960s but by comparison Tyson realy blew people away. he was huge! Some champions have come in and out of vouge. Liston for instance received a renaissance in the wake of the Tyson hysterics after slipping out of view.
Sorry I meant to say the 1920's/30's. And what I mean is from the footage I have seen boxing I've seen appeared to be more basic, much less athletic and slower than the footage I have seen from 1950\60 onward. When you compare Tyson's and Ali's size and hand speed and compare it to the top heavyweights between 1880 and 1940 there is a huge difference. Even highly ranked heavyweights like Dempsey and Louis are lighter than Tyson but look far slower. Esp when you watch them train on a heavy bag the difference is huge. Its like they hit it slower than Tyson and with much less force. I was watching some footage of Dempsey today and his fights just looked like a drunken street brawl. He looked sloppy and looked like if he ever got in the ring with the likes of Ali, Tyson, Holmes, Lewis, Holyfield or even the current two brothers he would get taken apart cause all those guys look bigger stronger and more skillfull in my opinion. I know a lot of people will disagree with me but I just can't see someone like Dempsey beating those type of modern heavyweights. I know people will say but he beat Jess Willard but he's not in the same league as the guys I mentioned above.
No disrespect he was the best at the time apart from all the black guys he refused to fight! But can you really see someone like Ali, Tyson or Lewis having much trouble putting him away. Its a bit like Bradman in Australia in the 30's and 40's who averaged 99 runs a game in cricket but against modern bowlers and fielding he would never average that score . Just as Babe Ruth would not be anywhere as good in modern baseball. Would you seriously put money on Dempsey against the likes of prime Tyson, Ali, Holmes or Lewis?
Actually, I agree with you 100% - I just think it's brave of you to say what you did, in a forum where old-timer nuthuggery is a favourite pastime of many posters.
"old timer nuthuggery" is not a pastime. "nuthuggery" is a word that is used against a historian when a greenhorn has been stumped by more research and ring sence. Its a kind of failure to back up a theory when it resorts to name calling.
When Greg Chappell was captain of the Australian Cricket team, he invited Don Bradman down to training and the 60 year old version belted Lillee and Thommo all over the paddock. He may not have averaged 99, but with Rule changes that outlawed bodyline theory, he may have averaged over 100! Bradman was to cricket what Bob Fitzsimmons was to boxing or Walter Lindrum was to billiards. There records will never be duplicated.
How about the other point I made in my thread about maybe Vitali and Wlad being born maybe twenty years earlier and entering pro boxing in the eighties (of course if the Soviets allowed it). I think it would have been awesome having two giant Soviet fighters challenging an aging Holmes in 1985 or a young Tyson in 1986\7. If the two brothers entered the heavyweight scene around the time Rocky 4 came out in the mid eighties with all the Cold war stuff going on I think they would have created a lot of excitement. As for Bradman he only ever played England and the 1948 Invincibles won in a country that had just gone through six years of war and was still on rations! They most likely would have been destroyed by the Windies of the 80's or the Australian team of the late 90's early 00's. from the footage I have seen they don't even dive for the ball when fielding they just watch it go past or run after it. Ever watched Aussie rules football from the 70's or 60's the players are much weaker looking, slower and less skilled. Even from the eighties it looks much worse than today. Some sports do improve more than others while there are standouts in older era's that can compete in modern eras. But if you put Jim Brown (famous NFL running back) against modern NFL defences he would not dominate like he did in the sixies cause they are much stronger and quicker. He might do well but not as good as he did back then. There is a reason you haven't seen a guy weighing 180-190 pound win the heavyweight championship for the last 50 years. If Dempsey could beat these huge modern heavyweights how come we haven't seen 180-190 pound whites guys taking up the fight in the heavyweight division for the last four decades. There are millions of guys who are 5.10 to 6.1 tall in that weight range (180-190) in America and Europe, never see them challenging for the heavyweight championship. Some slim down and go for Super Middleweight or LH but never HW. White Americans used to dominate the point guard and shooting guard position in the NBA many at the height of 6.0-6.3 how often do you see that these days? Imagine taking Michael Jordan or Lebron James back to play in the NBA in the Fifties! Dominating the fight game when Black fighters were allowed to be banned is like winning the 100m sprint at the Olympics after they have banned all the runners of West African decent!
Sir,do you want to put an asterisk on every white champion of the past ? Who of the past white champions have you seen ? To say that the 1930s and 1940s haven't produced fighters who would more than compete with today's alphabet champions is a slur on a Henry Armstrong, Tony Canzoneri, Lou Ambers, Jimmy McLarnin, Billy Petrolle, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Jake LaMotta, Freddie Steele, Ike Williams, Willie Pep, and other great fighters who fought more than 100 bouts against the best fighters and OFTEN...I have seen most of these great fighters ringside. They were great in every era....So please have respect for the past, as you and I will also be part of the past...One other thing, Joe Louis with his trip hammer blows, would do very well sir with today's behomoths. Yessir. cheers:hi:
