Plus the idea that todays heavyweights are some totally different breed to past fighters is just not true. Just consider this, in 1974 a past-prime Ali beat a young George Foreman by KO, in 1997 a 48-year-old, slow and fat Foreman outboxed prime Shannon Briggs pretty easily only to get robbed on the cards. 13 years later a shot 40-year-old Briggs is still around, but not only that, is deemed good enough to get a title shot at Vitali. But past champions like Louis and Ali would have no chance in the modern era
It seems so painful for some people to admit that guys from the past are not the mythical beasts they have been made out to be. They almost all lost to bums, they were all highly beatable and primitive by today's standards. They were tough, exciting, great for their time and deserve respect but they would not stand up to today's heavyweights, people need to start accepting this, however traumatic it is.
Yes there has been only progress in olympic wrestling, pole vaulting and high jumping. Boxing must be the only sport in the world that has been stagnant for the last 130 years :rofl:rofl:rofl This is so ridiculous I don't know where to start.
Remember we had threads here on the forum when some geniuses argued Dempsey would '****' Wlad and 'outbox Lewis in close quarters'. Here's how primitive boxers were 90 years ago: [yt]aJkiwu_04dw[/yt]
Stop bringing other sports into to moron. We are talking boxing here. If you can't talk box or break down styles gtfo. Its clear to any knowledgeable boxing fan that skills of former champions were set to a much higher standard. The top 5 greatest boxers of all time existed 50-70 years ago. There is not one fighter today who could crack the top 100.
Stop generalising. Are you saying that HW's of the past wouldn't stand up to Wlad, Haye, Fury, Povetkin, Arreola, Wilder, Pulev, Hillenius and Chisora etc?? atsch
Mostly, yes. Wlad is close to impossible to beat at the moment, Chisora would be a handful for anyone, Haye has the power, speed and accuracy to KO almost anyone, the other guys you mentioned...who knows/cares?
Wow! If you knew anything about boxing, you'd know that there's been strong era's and weak era's of each division. Some divisions today maybe stronger than some divisions of certain era's and vice versa. Some champs of today would beat some champs of yesteryear. Likewise, many champs of yesteryear would beat today's champs. There's been ups and downs. But there is no evidence to suggest that boxing as progressed as a whole. Boxing isn't like any other sports. Strength and conditioning coaches, and improvements in nutrition, training facilities and equipment etc, can only help a fighter so much. They still have to perfect a number of skills that have nothing to do with advancements in sports science. If boxing continually progressed each decade, then today's MW's would be the best MW's of all time. Today's HW's would be the best of all time. Today's LHW's would be the best of all time. But they aren't. You are just generalising and making a fool of yourself. Ray Robinson's prime was 70 years ago! That's a hell of a long time. What do you think would happen if he fought today's top WW's? Would they go through him? How about Henry Armstrong, Roberto Duran, Muhammad Ali and Bob Foster etc at their respective weights? How would they do today? Would they all get crushed by today's superior fighters? NO!
Alexander Aljechin was one of the greatest chess players who ever lived, 90 years ago. Yet he wouldn't win against a random 18 year old GM today. And still he is regarded as one of the greatest ever! Greatness doesn't mean you will beat your peers from 100 years in the future. Food for thought, mate. All sports have evolved massively. Boxing of course is no exception. deal:deal
:good Where's the body punching, the in-fighting, the double hooks and the body shots? They're not as common. I started a thread a while ago asking if 15 rounds should be brought back? A few guys said no, because the fighters would gas and it would be a boring hug fest. That tells you everything you need to know about today's supposedly superior athletes.
The skills of todays fighters are not great, especially in the heavyweights, just look at Sam Peter needing a robbery to beat old, fat, shot former middleweight Toney, look at Hopkins, even at almost 50, his old school skills are too much for many of the 'World level' modern fighters.
Pure ignorance. So Arreola, Chisora and Fury etc, would beat most HW's of the past? Based on what? Wlad is impossible to beat at the moment? Who's he fighting? I think Wlad would have struggled in the 80's and 90's against Tyson, Holmes, Holyfield, Bowe, Ibeabuchi, Lewis etc.