In most sports the current guys are better than previous eras, why would boxing be any different?

I don’t think this is the case for any sport to be honest. If Roberto Duran in the 70’s found a time machine and took on a top fighter of today from 135 to 147 I think he whoops any of them. Same goes for soccer or basketball. Put prime Diego Maradona on the field and he does the same thing he did in the 80’s. Prime Larry Bird does the same on the court.

 

Fighters from the 60’s and 80’s can beat the current best guys, but the reverse is also true. Also, records and stats don’t say a lot because boxing rules have changed over the years, so that makes it hard to compare eras, but that said a good fighter is a good fighter regardless of what era they’re born in.

Also, what some people call progress isn’t always progress. Somethings such as medicine, therapy, and surgery are undoubtedly much better than they were in the past. However, Its debatable whether current athletes overall are better, since rules change. It’s also debatable that nutrition has gotten better.

One example I’ll use is the NBA. A lot of people will argue that the current players are better or a guy like LeBron James is superior to a Connie Hawkins or a Bernard King. However, LeBron James also plays in an NBA that has a strict hand-checking rule, which makes it much easier to score as compared to the past. Also, the Nba over the last 15-20 years has gotten really lax on allowing traveling.

As for boxing the gloves with attached thumbs (not progression), less rounds, no same-day weighins, more weight classes, and more titles make becoming a champion nowadays much easier as compared to the past.

 

Cricket is an interesting one as well. Nobody I can think of has broached 100mph bowling speeds for around a decade now. At the turn of the century there were a couple, and even one that was capable back in the 70s. Generally the fast bowling stocks were much deeper and quicker in the 80s and 90s than they are today.

 

Skill and talent pool.

Youngsters today don't box, they play basketball or do MMA

 

technology has improved.

 

Even Larwood in the 30s was up there.

 

Tell me more about this please. Are you sure that the speeds are all accurately recorded, using the same methods?
In baseball many more pitchers throw 100 MPH. WIth a much larger population & more athletes from around the world & more scientific trainiung adding a bit to great natural talents, that should not be surprising.

Are the measures accurate in cricket, & like baseball are many more people playing it?

 

It isnt.

Fury>Klitschko>Lewis>Foreman>Liston>Marciano>John L Sullivan

 

Definitely cannot vouch for the accuracy of the speed, but it seems pretty consistent across eras with the slower bowlers.

Cricket has exploded post-1980s, especially within India. My theory is that as more money has been pumped into the game the top end speed bowlers have declined due to:
- high stress slinging bowling actions being coached out of youngsters.
- the money in the game has exploded in the last 10 years. With so many games being played it would be natural for bowlers to act with greater self preservation.

Good article here https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...owlers-england-cricket-new-peak-plateau-ashes

 

Agree.The shelf life of 150+km bowlers isn't as long as a 130 km guy. With huge money in the Indian premier league,its smarter to try and prolong your career for as long as possible.

 

The biggest difference I see with the majority of modern heavyweights compared to old school guys is the amount of muscle mass modern heavys carry. It seems old guys did very little weight training. Joe Frazier on the Superstars program couldn't even press 72 kgs above his head. However the top heavyweight of our time now is Fury and it seems he doesn't do a huge amount of weight training,preferring to work on other methods.

 

It is kind of obvious that that has to be the case. The measurable sports such as athletics have consistently developed and boxing as a whole is probably the most athletic depending sport that there is. Speed power, reflex, agility, stamina you need it all.

also the talent pool is way bigger then it was ever before.
Soviet russia was always a tremendous country in terms of boxing but amateur boxers had almost no opportunity to change to the pro ranks. This has changed.

also the latin countrys have improved their boxing very much. The times of mexican macho fighters are long gone. Today you have so many high tech latino fighters out their.

 

I would take a SRR or SRL or Tommy Hearns to make short work of our current crop of Welterweights. Hagler, Monzon and again SRR would make pretty short work of today's MW's. I doubt Mike McCallum would have much trouble with the current LightMiddles as he was vastly superior technically, had an ATG chin and an engine that could go on for days.

The boxers of old tended to come from far tougher back grounds. Imagine being bought up in the depression era in the states. Fighting every few weeks was the norm, 15 round fights and fewer belts so you end up fighting the best comp. time after time. I think the Heavyweights of the past may struggle but, the lower weights.....the FAB Four would rinse their respective opposition in today's era.