Heavyweights & age through the era's

i've thought about this, and thought it has to be a reflection of humans living longer.
i.e. - a 36 year old heavyweight boxer in 1964 would be equivalent to a 42 yr old boxer today...to me thats what a difference has made in 50 years.

todays life expectancy is around 79 for a man and 83 for a woman.....in 1960 it was 68 for a man and 74 for a woman....in first world countries like uk / usa.
in 1930....59 for a man and 63 for a woman.
so...i think its natural that a boxers peak is longer...or in the case of a heavyweight...later.

 

The current era just sucks. The current beached whales clutch and grab and suck wind. Top contenders turn pro's much much later in life compared to days past. The current era fights very infrequently compared to past eras. Bigger gloves reducing trauma.

The idea that suddenly boxers discovered that 'hey maybe I shouldn't get hit' and are defensive masters because of that epiphany....is laughable and simply ignorant, but consider the source of such idiocy.

 

Very well said Germ!..The top 10 of today stink cause they have a bunch of nobodys to choose from!..But your right it is Laughable and Simply ignorant my man! (Not bad for a Newbie)!..:worm:conf:good

 

And obviously your brain didnt reach its true prime eh!

 

I'm not buying that the fountain of discovered has been found by the modern era. Yes, adherence to a strict diet and good maintenance of the body outside the ring can extend a fighter's prime years, but only to a point.

I don't follow American sports much, but in the English Premier League (football/soccer) the best players are not well into their mid to late thirties. There are a few pretty good players of around that age, but they were better in their twenties. A few exceptions like Giggs or Scholes can be found where they're into their 40's, but they are used sparingly and very much showing their age.

The simple reason is that there is a steady influx of good young talent in that sport, and the older guys find it difficult to compete eventually. It really is that simple to me.

In boxing though, you can pick your spots, so to speak. Shrewd management goes a long way, and there is no steady stream of good young talent in the heavyweight division.

If the division was filled with hot new talent regularly, these oldies would have to make way.

 

Agree with doug.ie here.

Less arduous and healthier lifestyles, added to a superior diet leads to longer and healthier life and maintaining your physical and athletic peak longer.

Added to the fact that a lot of fighters nowadays cherry pick their opposition on their way up, they therefore have less hard fights on their way to the top as opposed to "the good old days" when more fighters were matched tough from day 1 of their pro careers & had to fight much harder just to reach contender status - and as anyone who understands boxing would know, the more hard fights you have shortens your shelf life as a fighter.

 

The football analogy is not a perfect fit I agree, nor was it intended to be. It does serve to back up (to a point) my claim that sportsmen and women are very rarely the best at what they do past the age of 35 in deeply competitive sports like football, where there is no chance of choosing opponents.

Which boxers of 35+ are better than their younger selves? Wlad isn't. I think he's showing clear signs of declining actually. Certainly Vitali wasn't. Floyd isn't. You could argue that they have more experience now which is certainly true, but physically they are not the same anymore.
But then, it doesn't show so badly because their opponents are just as old.

Nornally I'd agree about the strength events, but look at the young guys like Shaw and Bjornsson coming through, and who are at or close to the top of Strongman, so even there, where I agree that traditionally athletes seemed to come into their own at around 35, that notion is being challenged.

There is no denying that experience counts for a whole lot, but on a physical level, I still maintain a guy of 27 is better than a guy at 37, unless he doesn't take care of himself.

 

I think that the top boxers are getting older across the weight classes to be honest.

It might be simply that the old timers got started younger, and fought more frequently, so they burned out sooner.

 

Its better conditioning/training/nutrition coupled with fewer and less frequent fights. Not brain surgery.

 

I think it just takes longer to become established. There is so much protective matchmaking going on that talented fighters spend years and years treading water. The dilution of the titles means even champions can be undermatched. Champions are preserved for longer waiting to catch on as a pay for view attraction.

Take Joe Calzaghe, he was treading water for years as a minor champion, rival champions came and went then he used his experience to take over once Lacy came along and established himself. A lot of bigger fights could have been all along with Ottke, Beyer etc but they all continued defending parallel to one another.

Bernard Hopkins too. It was the Trinidad fight that made him, but he'd been ticking over quietly for years as a belt holder who nobody cared about. It takes years to catch on. Most fighters are older because with 3 fights a year it takes a long time to get to 20-0 and wait for that tired champion to defend in the new kids home town.

 

I think fewer fights and more available titles put less wear and tear on a fighters body today. Take the HW's for example. How often do you see a top ranked heavyweight or champion in the ring? After Ali lost to Frazier in '71 he had 14 fights before winning the title again in '74 against Foreman...and that included a rematch against Frazier and 2 grueling fights with Ken Norton. 14 fights in roughly 3 years. Who has that schedule today? I can't think of any top ranked HW's or champions who do. Fighting once or twice every year or two will certainly help to stretch out a career in the ring. Plus having more than one recognized title holder per weight class allows a champion to avoid fighting the other belt holder(s) while hand picking his opponents. It's not the dog eat dog 1 champion on top world of Boxing that it used to be....and that's sad.

 

No question that experience is the best teacher. Decades ago most boxers had 100 pro fights by the time they reached age 30. This experience allowed them to reach their peak by that age. In today's pro boxing, most fighters only have about 30 pro fights by that age. Thus, they miss out on all the experience their fistic forefathers had. Naturally it follows that they will reach their peak at a later age.

If it were up to me, we'd have FAR more fights with lots of action taking place at the same time in different regions. No longer will we have a monthly boxing show exclusively in Las Vegas. Instead, we would have the return of Friday Night Fights on commercial TV. There would be championship fights every week and we could all enjoy more boxing like we did in the old days. Through this the boxers would get the type of experience they need and can only get in the boxing ring, not the gym. And in the long run, pro boxing will improve and the boxers will be household names just as in the past.