History of professional boxing if Soviet countries could fight pro?

Agreed. They were not ''far and away the most dominant nation''. :rofl

 

thats fair they did fine, to say they dominated is ridiculous

 

First ... NO U.S. boxer who was the best in the country at that time EVER went to the Olympics. That's the whole point.

When Muhammad Ali was the dominant heavyweight champion in the late 60s, he wasn't fighting in the Olympics. He did when he was a teenager, but not when he was fighting his best.

When Foreman was the dominant heavyweight champion in 1973-74, he wasn't fighting in the freaking World Championships in Havana. He was obliterating the likes of Frazier and Norton.

When Holmes was the greatest heavyweight on the planet - from '78 to probably '82, he wasn't fighting in the Olympics. He was fighting Norton, Shavers, Cooney, etc.

See a pattern here?

If Ali never turned pro, think the 1972 version of Ali would've performed better against Stevenson than Duane Bobick did? How difficult is this to grasp?

I think Ali in 1972 would've wiped the floor with Stevenson. I think Foreman in 1974 and 1976 would've wiped the floor with Stevenson. I think Holmes in 1980 would've wiped the floor with Stevenson.

Does that answer your question?

If U.S. fighters didn’t turn pro, Stevenson, in particular, wouldn’t have won crap. A prime Ali, a prime Foreman, a prime Holmes … would’ve defeated him. If Duane Bobick could beat Stevenson (which he did prior to the Olympics), Ali would’ve.

And enough of this just counting medals. The U.S. won FIVE GOLD MEDALS in the 1952 Olympics. The U.S.S.R. won six medals (two Silver, four Bronze).

By your tally, the U.S.S.R. performed better. By any Olympian’s standard, FIVE GOLD MEDALS trumps a handful of bronze medals.

 

This is the flaw with all these comparisons.

Holmes was an inexperienced amateur when he lost to Bobick in 1972. That’s MY WHOLE POINT. Holmes peaked EIGHT YEARS LATER.

No American AT HIS BEST fought in the Olympics, because our fighters turned pro. Our best were being paid.

If the U.S. was like Cuba and the U.S.S.R., in 1972, neither Holmes nor Bobick would’ve even challenged to go to the Olympics. Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Lyle, Shavers, etc. would’ve fought to see who went to the Olympics. Holmes and Bobick never would’ve survived the prelims in 1972.

And Mirosnichenko lost to Bowe in the Olympics. Regardless, by the time Bowe reached his prime in 1992, Mirosnichenko was getting knocked out by Oleg Maskaev in Maskaev's pro debut. I'm sure if BOWE AT HIS BEST WENT TO THE 1992 OLYMPICS, he'd have done just fine. He was the undisputed World Heavyweight Champion that year, I'm sure he'd have managed.

And regarding your “medal” counts, from 1952 to 1988 when the U.S. faced the U.S.S.R. head-to-head, the U.S. won 22 gold, 7 silver and 10 bronze medals, while the U.S.S.R. won 13 gold, 10 silver and 18 bronze medals.

The U.S.S.R. finished with 41 total medals. The U.S. finished with 39 total medals.

But 22 of those 41 U.S. medals were Gold, to only 13 Golds for the U.S.S.R.

And when the U.S. and Cuba competed head to head in 1972 and 1976 – the only Olympics they faced each other before the Soviet Union broke up, Cuba won 6 Gold, 4 silver and 3 bronze medals. And the U.S. won 6 Gold medals, 1 silver and 4 bronze.

So Cuba won 13 medals, and the U.S. won 11 medals, but they both finished with six golds each.

Like I said, the U.S. did fine sending NO ONE who was the best fighter at that weight in the country. While Cuba and the U.S.S.R. sent the best guy they had at the weight.

Finally, I've talked my head off about the Amateur World Championships. Our teams for that tournament were always WORSE than our Olympic teams, because after the Olympics, even our best amateurs (who weren't as good as our pro champs) left the team. So we had to start from scratch.

Look at all the heavyweight champs from the U.S. between 1974 until the Soviet Union fell, and no world heavyweight champion was going to lose to the guy who won the gold medal or amateur World Championships in those years.

 

Mate could at not show your bias by counting the 9 gold medals won by America when Soviet Union and Cuba didn't compete in 1984, this would leave both gold medal tallys during that period at 13 gold a piece, and then soviet hadore of te other medals

And you do know that Ali,Holmes etc wouldn't have been the same fighters if they had to fight over three rounds, some were slow starters and never that good in the amateurs anyway, your also forgetting at all these soviet amateurs had full time jobs too, it wasn't like they ever got the chance to train full time. Would Ali or holmes be the same fighters in there prime if try could only fight over 3 rounds and had to hold down a full time job at the same time? I think not

You've heard the saying some amateurs don't make good pros, well I'm pretty sure some pros wouldn't make good amateurs either

 

Enough from you.

I didn't count any medals from 1984. Five gold medals from 1952, two from 1956, three from 1960, one from 1964, two from 1968, one from 1972, five from 1976, three from 1988, equals 22.

Those are the years the U.S. and U.S.S.R. competed in Olympic boxing.

He's the one who was counting medals from years the U.S. didn't compete.

Go sit down.

 

MANY of the Soviet boxers didnt have "jobs".

They had nominal positions in the army or Police force or other government jobs and were able to train as full time boxers.

Also these pros that he was talking about clearly DID make good amateurs. Foreman, Frazier, Ali, Leonard, all won gold medals when they were bsaically kids.

Are you saying they would have had less chance of winning when they were older, better and stronger?

 

Iv heard Hearn and guys like that ring mentioned and they wernt great amateurs,that's what I'm on about

And do you have any evidence of them only holding nominal positions instead of real jobs?

Cammerelle,Nolan today both police officers who have full time jobs what makes you think the soviets back 40 years ago were any diffenant

 

Evidence?

It was the Soviet Union! Every boxer who fought at the time in the amateurs said the same thing.

We're not talking about Ireland or Italy which are typical, western fairly capital;ist countries.

This was a country completely run by a central; government. If the government thought it would be good for an athlete to expand the glory of the motherland, then they were given cushy jobs and allowed train.

This is common knowledge. Not just for boxing, any olympic sport

The Soviet union was COMPLETELY different society

 

So your just guessing right? With absolutely no evidence

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...nepage&q=communist athletes full time&f=false

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...nepage&q=communist athletes full time&f=false


If you knew ANYTHING about Soviet Athletics, I wouldnt have to waste my time.

Do I need a link showing the sky is blue too?

 

And this.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_Winter_Olympics#Ice_hockey

All you have to do is literally type "Communist full time athletes"

Or "full time amateurs...soviet union"

Or anything like it into Google.

Or you could just have the slightest idea how the Soviet Union was run

 

Can't see any references or first hand accounts, the guy isn't is Indian

Where did he get this information?

 

Are you being serious??

Do you literally not know that Soviet Athletes were full time athletes?
Or are you just winding me up?

Seriously type "full time amateurs" and "soviet union" or various types of that into google and see the countless pages that come up.

This is so well known that the onus is not even on me to prove it. Its up to you to prove its not true

Or look for the dozens of interviews out there of Communist athletes that defected.