I saw a thread done on this topic with the heavyweight weight division so let's try the welterweight division. Amongst other divisions, the welterweight division has been one of the deepest historically, you can argue that it's just as deep or even deeper than both the middleweight and the heavyweight division in terms of a historical aspect. Looking at fights like these, what group of boxers would you favor, past or present? H2H: Sugar Ray Robinson vs Floyd Joy Emilie Griffith vs Felix Trinidad Henry Armstrong vs Manny Pacquiao Kid Gavilan vs Oscar De La Hoya Fritzie Zivic vs Terry Norris Jose Napoles vs Simon Brown Barney Ross vs Antonio Margarito Etc.
Welterweights have to be the same size, so the same basic body type. That makes "progress" harder to be certain about than hw's, where the body types have clearly grown considerably. I think some of the old greats like Hearns would have a great chance against the best of today.
Yes I understand what you are saying. I was trying to explain this to a poster who didnt get it today with regards to MWs. Many during Haglers reign were not (not all) around 6ft like many were during Hopkins reign. SR Leonard I think would do well also as he was a big WW also
Somewhere else I have read it stated the talent pool is much greater now than in the past for reasons of population growth and the broadening opportunity to box in countries where in the past the pathway to elite level either did not exist or was not as clear as now. Which on the surface sounds reasonable until you scratch underneath it. If you take the modern era in isolation and then compare it to the countless other eras throughout the ages of boxing then the modern talent pool is much less than the combined talent pools of all the previous generations. The numbers game actually counts against those active today, and this is especially relevant to the divisions other than Heavyweight, which obviously benefits modern fighters due to the general trend which has seen them become taller and heavier. With regards to Welterweights, it's simply too much to ask the modern era to produce as much boxing talent as all the previous eras combined and, therefore, the past eras will have within them the greater talent overall...
Your thinking of talent pool wrong, that it's just number of people in a sport. Even there, what makes you think there are not more fighters now. I've seen boxrec data that says otherwise. But moreover, many of the tangible sports were records are broken routinely do have fewer participants. But those records are broken because the OVERALL talent pool is bigger. IE, there are more people in the world and more people that have access to get into the sport. The people with particularly advantageous body types then self select about getting in or are sought out or otherwise pushed or recruited into the sport.
Margarito was overrated. Mosley put him in his place. Floyd & Pac weren't really true welterweights...just the weight they finished their careers at. Errol Spence, Brook & Thurman are examples of true Welters. If Floyd & Pacquiao were true welters they'd hang with ease with true welters of the past.
Most the welters now are middle after they boil them and allow to rehydrate 10 or 15 lbs next day. See if they could make the weight same day.