The evolution of boxing

I do agree with this. I just don't subscribe to your theory about SHW boxers training down to 210 in the 50's and 60's

 

You're not getting the point I'm making. 8 weeks with all of the new advantages would most probably make Pep a bigger weight, and over a longer period of time, it most certainly would make him too big for the weight. His body, like all others at the time are conditioned differently, and to overcome that conditioning is going to take a lot of time.

The scoring criteria is always honoured, but fight philosophies differ. i.e Mayweather, Maidana.
To that end, and given the types of opponents that Pep fought, he would point-score accordingly.
Refer to my first post, use logical deduction.

 

The point missing is that most SHW boxers of today would not be SHW if they were born many years ago.

Wlad is about 6'3 220 if he was born in 1915. maybe smaller. he wouldnt have modern training techniques and diet, etc. So if he fought Joe Louis is 1940 the size difference would not be the same.

If you put Louis in 2015 he is now 6'3 1/2 or so and 230 instead of 6-2 210.

You cant punish old fighters for their lack of size coming forward unless youre gonna punish new fighters going back. Thats why pure "put em in a time machine" head to head is flawed.

At lower wt classes its comparing men of generally the same size, but still- The man who is 160 in 1925 mite be 160 naturallry, where as todays 160 guy may be a more manufactured 160. Which is better? to be a 145 pounder who pumps iron and is 160 or a natural 160 guy? How does same day weigh ins effect this?

Bottom line is you really cant answer this. Its fun to talk about it. But there is no definitive answer.

And the concept that fighters are better today, period, is stupid. You think George Foreman wants to go 45 rounds in 100 degree heat with jack Johnson or jim Jeffries? Probably not. Rule changes and many differences some have already noted here negate the "all current fighters must be better" argument.

Boxing is unlike other sports. Having wt classes negates quite a bit of the difference in eras. Yes, skills are different, but the way boxing was fought is different. Bottom line its fun to argue, but also almost impossible to really answer.

 

The rest of you post wasn't bad, but you know height is overwhelmingly genetic, right? Short of starvation, or other extreme measures that wouldn't apply, environmental factors maybe boost or trim an inch off, at the very most. If Wlad was born in 1915, there's little reason to think he'd be any different height than now. The average US male born in 1915 was only about .75 inches shorter than the one born in 1985. By the same token, Louis would probably be about the same height. Heavier, sure, but at most a fraction of an inch taller.

 

The theory I have is that fighters are as big as they need to be in order to be successful in the era they fight when using what they have access to. This, I believe has always been the case.

SHW boxers from today would not need to "train down" because they would never reach that weight in the first place training in the 1950s.

The accuracy required for a giant to be successful under an older situation demanded a thinner giant.

 

So you don't think Pep could keep his weight at 126 given an 8 week camp? I totally disagree.

So if scoring is honoured the same for both fighters, how is it you envision Rigo defeating Pep? KO or points? And on points how do you think he would achieve that? I can't wait for you're logical deductions.

 

I can get that for 15 rounds they need to be a bit leaner, in theory... how many big hw fighters changed their weight during the transition from 15 to 12, I don't think their was a big discrepancy and I certainly think Lewis would always be much bigger than Rocky.

 

Take height out of it then. What thesnowman22 says is still correct. A SHW would still not be anyway near as heavy in an earlier time. Even a natural one. Too much of the rules, equipment, diet and training has changed to make them as heavy.

 

Yes Lewis would be a lot bigger than Rocky. No bigger than 218-224 and he would still have that height and reach.

 

I don't know. I really don't see it.

Obviously we'll never know but I think more 230-240

 

Why? Lewis weighed in less than 230lb a grand total of NINE times in real life!

Take him back at 16 years old and put him on a 1940 boxing training programme up to the age he did win a world title, I can't imagine Lewis developing so heavy as he was. Why would he?

 

To use his size as an advantage.

 

Three paragraphs..three points. #1. The depth and the amount of fights they had then far outweigh all this modern training ****, sure in rugby league this sort of training makes a huge difference, just look at Jarryd Waerea Hargreaves the last few weeks, he is unstoppable, a giant packed solid full of muscle and can motor along fast enough to make him a steam train and all because he understands that rugby league although there are many different skills is basically a power sport and he uses modern weight training and lots of running to build himself up so that when he hits the line at speed the tackler risks serious injury, anyhow lately he has been awesome and it really looks like your money should be on the Roosters this year. In boxing there is power but what counts more is skills and experience, one quote earlier mentioned the amount of fights fighters had in the old days, you can't compare a guy who fights twice a year to guys who fought 20 fights a year, the old timers had ten times the experience and also ten times the depth... whats better, a bloke who is the best of a pool of 3000 welterweights or a guy who is the best of a pool of 120 ??? well usually it is the former. The modern training is no better for boxing I feel these days.. in fact I think the old timers trained on skills and technique far more than they lifted weights. Bob Fitzsimmons scorned muscle bound men, he laughed at how STIFF they were whereas Bob was just as strong but his training made his steel like muscles elastic, he didn't sacrifice his fast reflexes by being musclebound like a body builder, boxers actually require a different type of body, he would punch the **** out of Jarred Waerea Hargraves but would have no hope of stopping him getting over the tryline... different sports different needs.

Actually that was #1 and #2 paragraphs answered, now for the 3rd. So glad you mentioned Bradman, many here are americans and most of them don't know who he was, but in cricket he was and is still untouchable, nobody since during or before his career come even close, to put him in perspective just imagine he is SRR.... now imagine the next best boxer ever is Anthony Mundine..... thats how far he was ahead of the next best batsman in history and who is 2nd is highluy debateable... Jack Hobbs ?, Tendulkar, Ricky Ponting ? Wally Hammond ?, Graeme Pollock ?.. hard to say isn't it yet there stands the Don.... the unbeatable, the god of cricket.... a thousand years of cricket may come and go but no one will ever come near his incredible batting average of 99.94 runs per innings... the next best for any player who had more than 40 tests is about 61.00 to 62.00..... incredible, how f****** good was he ? a one of a kind freak, sport has never seen anything like him.

 

So are you saying that todays boxers are superior and would beat any of the greats from say, the 40's or 20's ??? if so how do you work that out ????... this is not athletics where everything is measured by time, this is a sport where experience and technique and pure guts is the ruler.

 

So all on his own Lewis would bulk up in the 1950s? I don't see how he would. Or could.

Under the training of the day he would be concentrating on aspects that were paramount to the 1950s. No weight training. No strength training. No diet protein and vitamin supplements. No interval training for short spurts of explosive activity. No altitude training.

Instead he would be skipping, medicine ball training, chopping trees, eating steak and boiled vegetables after running as far as the middleweights did. Burning more calories. Not developing muscle. Not eating before bed time.

Lewis was under 230lb nine times with all he had access to in the 1990s. Why would he be 240lb as tall as was in 1950 if he was restricted to 1950 training and diet?