Heavyweights. Old timers vs modern.

Only in your head. Out classing somebody is not defined by winning 3 rounds , getting your face torn off and losing by the mid-way point.
But I don't see how that answers my question.

 

3 rounds? Official scorecards were 4 and if we're going off official, there's as much argument for 5 or 6 as three. Either way, it was a great fight, my all time favorite. I'm genuinely not sure who would have won the rematch or who would have won the most often prime for prime. Anyone claiming otherwise is a partisan. It's one of the great unanswered hw boxing questions and why there have been countless threads devoted to it.

Other atgs lost to atgs in an initial fight, Louis Schmeling, Ali Frazier, and went on to avenge the loss later. Those atgs unquestionably lost more decisively in the initial fight than Vitali did, but Lewis chose not to give Vitali the chance see if that would happen in his case, and that was his right.

Either way, it doesn't change broad trends. The talent pool is much larger nowadays. The body types have changed. Maybe Lewis is better h2h than any hw in history, but he was active 15 years ago, that's still within the modern era.

 

Gonna bump this one last time. Would be good to see some more votes, though it's at a healthy amount as it is. Looks like modern is going to win. I'm pleasantly surprised. I guess attitudes have changed on the forum, that's good.

 

I am more surprised Lewis is tanking Ali in the poll I just made. Is that normal, has that happened before?

 

I float in and out of the forum, but since I've checked back in the last week, the moderns have been doing much better in polls than I've ever seen in the past. I think your poll will tighten up more once more people chime in, but then, I thought the moderns would eventually lose the lead on this too. Really looks like attitudes are changing on this forum. Of course, that's probably mostly just more modernists are using it than before, but still.

 

A prime Ali (before banishment) & Holmes beat any modern HW.

 

Why are you referring to Vitali as an ATG? He isn't one.

No , the talent pool is much smaller. Licienced boxers are at an all time low. You wouldn't know that because you know absolutely nothing about boxing. Your posts are an insult to the sport. Vermin like you only exist to trash the memories of past greats. In no other sport do you get turds like you.

 

Are you joking? There were so many great contenders in the golden era unlike today, many of which would probably have won a world title if they were around today. Shavers in this era would be a destroyer.

 

You're about the only person, along with a few other psychotic trolls, who wouldn't consider him one.

Regarding talent pool, it takes a smidge of intelligence to process this, so I know you won't follow. But I'll do it for others reading. The talent pool is much bigger now. I've had forum conversations with intelligent, respectful classicists, IE, the opposite of you. And they'd found and acknowledged boxrec records proving that there are slightly more pro boxers now than before.

That is beside the point to talent pool, though. There are probably no more Olympic participants in all of the tangible sports. You know, where every single sports record has been broken over the past 30 years?

But there doesn't need to be more participants for the talent pool to be bigger. There are simply MANY more humans now than ever before. And there are many more countries and populations exposed to boxing than ever before. That means many more opportunities for ideal body types. Then, they self select about their ability to succeed in sports, or try out different sports a bit and rapid success in an informal manner prompt formal participation. That's how Wilder got into it. Thus, a much bigger talent pool taking advantage of ideal body types for the sport. There's a good "Ted talk" show floating around that both modernists and classicists seem to like for different reasons that is floating around on the forums that describes this more.

And no, from your stupidity and negative mindset, you mistake my motivations. I don't want to demean past greats. I can't. Ali and Louis will always have the best legacy of all he's. I just want people to be realistic about h2h, and not give in to blind hero worship and all the other negative qualities that you epitomize so perfectly.

 

Show me proof that there are more licienced fighters right now than there was in the 30s- 90s??

Yeah , you keep saying this. Its about the 100th time ive heard it.
Show me an instance of a retired track runner , swimmer , poll volter , sprinter etc coming out of a 10 year retirement and winning gold in their 40's. One example.

Show me examples of fat top level tennis players , foot ballers , basket ball players etc.. ??? Im waiting.

 

And most dont go into boxing anymore. There are less trainers and gyms than ever before. How is it possible to be so clueless.
Its so bad right now that the two title holders in the division both fought Molina. A bum who can't box and took the sport up in his 20's.
He gets two title shots in a shot space of time because there is barley anybody out there. Stiverne is still in contention for the WBC despite only fighting once since the Wilder loss and being close to 40 years old. How is he still a top contender.
How dafuk is Ouqundo whose last good win was 2002 still in contention for a part of the WBA belt.
This era is so chit that Briggs is top 5. Biggs couldn't cut it in his own era 20 years ago.

 

Well, since your the one making the claims that go against logic and common sense, why don't you show them.

Specifically, you initiated the claim that there are fewer licensed boxers, so you should try to prove that. I suggest starting with boxrec.

As for your other claims, there have been swimmers in their 40s earning medals at the Olympics. And Babe Ruth was famously fat. Exceptions like that happen, but are ultimately irrelevant. All sports use different qualities. In hw boxing, chin, power, and experience is especially important. Those traits take a very long time to decline and in some cases improve with age. Weight can help absorb punches and prompt pacing yourself to conserve energy. These are physical traits that allow for greater age or girth. But you know what? They are still physical traits, and the rules of progress still apply.

 

Babe Ruth still holds records and he played 100 years ago. It took Barry Bonds and a wheel barrow full of peds to break Ruths records. Those home run records with least at bats have not been broken since the sport was cleaned up.
Ruth was clean and fat , so that blows away your whole argument that todays athletes are better simply because they exist in the now.

Looking at the sate of the division and comparing to past era is enough to know the there were far more contenders in the past. Its not even close and you would know that if you knew about the sport prior to 2005.

 

Translation? "Anecdote. And it's true because I believe it". You have no logic son, and it's obvious.

 

I can't prove it because it something i read years ago and i don't have the time to go researching the internet.

Unless you can disprove me its only true because you believe it? And id have a hard time believing anybody in the classic agreed there are more contenders now then there was then. Who was it .. Ill go ask him right now?