What if the all time great were training now

What differences would this actually make for his training in practice?

 

Marciano today would be 6'6 and 245 he had the frame of tua after all

 

I suppose Ali did just about ok at Deer Lake, Pennsylvania, despite 'only' having Angelo Dundee as his trainer.

 

I was first off giving a tongue in cheek response.

I of course know science, nutrition etc has improved, but using AJ as an example he had all the expertise of McCracken and English Institute for Sport in Sheffield, yet it only really in the Parker fight when he did not gas, so hi tech not answer to all issues, Ali smooth muscled and old skool training who did not lack stamina vs a chiselled AJ with all the modern science who until recently gassed in later rounds.

If only we had a time machine to bring Clay/Ali and train him in the modern era with all its science, and i truly believe if he was in this era, AJ, Wilder and Fury would each be part of a modern day bum of the month campaign for Ali.

 

I'm probably going to catch some crap for this, but I really don't believe very much of modern training science makes a noticeable difference in boxing as a sport - and I say this fully versed in the nuances of modern training. I agree with Unforgiven - in shape is in shape. I have yet to see any new-school fighter showing a leap or bound in improvement over any old-school fighter; I mean a ridiculous string of knockouts, or still throwing dozens of power shots in the 12th round any better than someone from an earlier generation. There are some stars, to be sure, but if there's any difference it still boils down to the fighter's individual skill level. Conditioning will always play a part, to be sure - but what form that conditioning takes, I think, isn't hugely important. If a guy wants to lift weights and do sprints, more power to him - but I'm still not convinced that it translates into anything better than what fighters have done for generations (I make an exception for injury prevention stuff, like rotator cuff work, that may add some longevity to the athlete).

Time to bob 'n weave, here come the brickbats ...

spt

 

I tend to believe that whatever traits they had that made them great would manifest itself to the same degree today.

 

For a lot of sports, definitely - T&F is a prime example. I just think, in comparison to other athletic pursuits, boxing is it's own beast. Not that it's impossible to find a better way, but after the objective stuff that can be quantified and measured and changed - VO2 max, body fat percentages, recruitment of fast/slow twitch muscle fibers - so much hinges on the intangibles: heart, talent and desire, and that unique one-on-one battle that makes boxing an epic contest. I never believed Michael Spinks beat Holmes (albeit debatable, he won the decision) because of Mackie Shilstone's training regimen. He won because he outfought him.

 

There's a few problems though, for one there have been a lot of changes to things like track surfaces that have caused a lot artificial improvements, even with that there are some records that have gone unbroken for decades. Plus the olympic sports have had a vast increase in professionalism, not nearly as much in boxing. When Jesse Owens set his time, not only would his time have still been elite if only he was on a modern track, but he was also going to university and working part time to pay for it. Or look at the modern Kenyan runners, they basically live in training camps, as soon as they have anything else going on they can no longer compete, and possibly the best Kenyan running coach is a missionary with zero sports science backround, or even any coaching training

And considering the number of modern boxers that gass in 12 round fights, I'd say he would've

 

I think there maybe would be marginal improvement if they truely trained scientifically, instead much more of it is broscience or just for show.

I mean is there really something you get from swinging ropes in a climate controlled gym that you wouldn't get from going climbing outside or swimming in a lake? I think the latter would give much more benefit.

Or maybe they decide that doing roadwork is bad for your knees, which actually isn't even really backed by the science, you just have to manage it properly. And they'll maybe decide something like, since boxing is done in bursts (ignoring there's almost always some level of activity underneath), you should just do intervals, usually saying something about energy systems while not understanding how they actually work, and of course they can't get nearly enough volume from these to build their aerobic system enough, and improvements to anaerobic respiration are more limited, and the better you are aerobically the less you have to do anaerobically, so they end up with crap stamina. SCIENCE!!!

 

Yes pastys are god like nutrition, as for running on the sand at Newquay, i'd prefer Hayle Towans, Newquay it a case of dodge the drunk, druggy or rest of societys human detritus, especially in the summer.

I most definitely am not critical of McCracken especially with regard Olympic team, and likewise am all for the modern scientific approaches to training, nutrition etc in boxing, old skool uncastrated wild boar or mexican beef can cause havoc so i have heard.

Sports nutrition most definitely has moved on, my uncle who played rugby as a prop in the 1960s at a quite high level, said that before a big match he would consume a proper meal of soup, egg steak and chips, followed by a dessert and a schooner of sherry, those were the days he ate well, fought well and still managed to live till his late 80s.

 

What is so strange about that?
A 6ft 3" guy gaining 32lbs from the age of 18-22?
Christ, one of my hod carriers gained over 4 stone in 3 yrs whilst that age range and believe me, it was natural.
Some guys just have the genetics.