Comparing different eras in boxing... Impossible?

i believe there should be ''modern era" lets say it starts from Muhammed Ali first title reign.

Same has been done in snooker they started this modern era from 70's and they started to count records from that time on.

There was joe davis snooker champion who was like 20 times champion but level was very low at that time, also for wining world title he received 10 pounds in prize or something.

 

Yes, it is possible, and if anyone tells you otherwise tell them to f*ck off.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl Thank you i needed this laugh :thumbsup

 

As one poster stated, if the timeline of fighters being compared have fought within 20-30 years of each other than you can make pretty good assessments on how hypothetical matchups would fare.

Where it starts to get a bit murky is when you try to compare fighters of the early 20th century to modern day fighters as there's too many variables that need to be factored in . Such as actual footage of the old timers, their workout regimens, their style of fighting, etc.

When I think of guys like Sam Langford and Harry Greb, 2 guys widely considered top 10 P4P fighters in the history of the sport, I'm always hesitant to engage in discussions on how either men would fare with other great fighters since there's very little film footage of either of these ATG's fighting in general, let alone in their respective primes.

I will say that fighters of recent times are for the most part bigger, stronger, faster and more athletic. But these are due to the innovative training regimens of today which old time fighters never had and it's also just simple biological evolution- guys of today are naturally more evolved physically compared to guys from 100 years ago. A good portion of that is environmental, as I said before present day fighters have a lot more at their disposal as far as nutrition/dieting and training equipment.

I don't mind comparing how guys like Mayweather would do against past fighters of more recent times like Pea WHitaker, Chavez Sr or the great Roberto Duran. But it would be hard for me to assess how he would do against guys where there's little footage of them fighting in their primes, guys such as Benny Leonard or Joe Gans.

 

Old era: Health come first, what kind of joke is that .

New era: My health come first and I'm serious.

 

What aspects you tryin to compare ?

 

Previous era's fighters are held in higher regard so that affects the analysis of all the fighters in previous era positively .

Also less weight classes mean they all fought each other and less criticism that a fighter wasn't beaten at his prime weight.

 

Also fighters these days fight less often so you can't say fighter from previous era is better based on more wins over hall of famers - although people use this argument

 

Since resume analysis has so many different variables, the "eye test" to compare fighters from different eras should be used.

 

Looking at elite fighters from each decade:

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=286885&page=5

 

Soooo. I originally read the title as "Comparing different ears in boxing... Impossible?"

I feel that thread should be made.

 

I agree. I would make the thread but I'm not brave enough and I care about my reputation here....

 

Impossible. It's all opinion.