Age in boxing? Good win vs bad win- what makes a fighter “old”

I’ll have a pop. Physically we usually hit our peak in our late 20’s, so in many sports that is when you’ll see the decline. Boxing can be different, as many fighters are still learning their craft at that age, so while they’re declining physically, technically they’re still improving. For me it’s when both avenues here are exhausted; he’s physically declining, and technically not improving.

What makes a good win, or a bad win? Personal taste (Fury’s boring kind of thing) Was the fighter old, but not shot? Do I not like the fighter, or his fans? That last part shouldn’t matter, but many fighters get criticised simply because some fans don’t like them.

That’s my basic take on it.

 

Depends on what the old fighter has achieved. For example, Klitschko vs Ortiz. The reason the klitschko win is much bigger is because he isn't just hype. He has evidence to back himself up, in the form of an olympic gold medal and numerous world titles along with one of the longest heavyweight reigns in history. Ortiz has none of those things. He has a decent amateur record and a decent professional record, that's it. No big boy titles, no medals, no nothing.

I also class Fury vs Wlad as a very good win unlike some people on this forum.

As for Loma vs Rigo...again it's a similar case of 'look at what he has done'. He is also an olympic gold medallist, a world champion. He also fights very similarly to that of Floyd Mayweather Jr, and he was great as an older fighter, so that's where that comes from. Rigo is similar, still very good even at that age and therefore you have to give Loma credit for beating him. That is despite a weight difference, despite the age.

As a masterboxer, the one thing you never lose is your brain. Rigo can fight on to 45 and still put up a good showing, simply because his style is based on adapting to what he sees.

 

A big difference comes from how long ago they were getting their big/signature wins, and whether they’ve shown decline in recent fights.

Povetkin had his best performances/wins maybe 4-7 years ago.

Ortiz got his big performances/wins like 2-3 years ago.

Wlad was clearly on the decline before Fury. He struggled so much with Jennings, who really isn’t very good. So he was definitely way worse when he faced Fury. And then AJ faced him way, way after Fury? Obviously he’s going to be shot to pieces by then.

Generally I say a white fighter is done by 39 and is just a KO waiting to happen.

Black fighters can tend to hold on a little longer for whatever reason. Maybe 42 or so.

 

Most fighters start declining after 35, doesn't matter black or white.

 

In the higher weights, speed is not as much of a factor. The speed of those little guys is incredible, so incredible that one of my friend after seeing footages of Pac vs El terrible, thought the video was accelerated. It was you see more guys later in life become better latter in higher weights while the decline become sooner in weights where speed is more of a factor.

 

I agree they decline around that age (35).

But they can still hang out and get some nice wins. Or be a nice win on someone else’s resume. They’re not totally gone.

At 39 or over, I basically stop respecting wins against them. They’re too far gone.

 

Defensive fighters tend to last longer than boxer-punchers. There are exceptions.

 

Agendas and bias play a huge part in who is "old" and who is not.

 

agree for most its just an excuse to soften the blow of their guy losing occasional it's legit maravilla Martínez vs Cotto comes to mind

 

Fighters who maximize and depend on speed and/or reflexes age worse/faster. A lot of times, this is a defensive minded boxer.

The old saying is "power is the last thing to go."

An accepted reality is that bantamweight and under fighters do not have the same longevity as heavier divisions.