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

There’s just no noticeable progression in the sport over each decade. There hasn’t been for a long time.

If you could take a bunch of great fighters from over the last 50 years and you could pit them against today’s best fighters, it would produce mixed results.

The outcomes of the fights wouldn’t be decided on who had the newer birth certificates.

The outcomes of the fights would be decided on how the guys matched up stylistically.

Why would Ali get wrecked today by Fury?

Based on what?

 

Which just proves that the sport ebbs and flows.

 

Ok first of he is rights its old people that argue on that. And cause your old you didnt get my sarcasm even though i explained it to you.

Yeah you just simply can see it witch your own eyes.
Fighters throw more punches in less less rounds go look it up.
They have more muscle on them.
They are faster look at the speed guys like gary russel junior, loma, canelo, wilder and so on.
The ko percentages are higher. We have had hw champions with ko percentages very close to 90% for 20 years now with the klits and aj, wilder.
Their technique is also much better they are tighter, they dont load up with their punches they trie to throw in the most direct way possible.

and no boxing is no exception from other sports. It is heavily driven by athletics just like all other combat sports.
A guy like froch is a perfect example of how much you can overcome technical mistakes by pure athleticism and phisique. The guy has bad defence, is quit flat on his feet but could still ko guys that where far better amateurs then him, simply because he has the edge in athletics. Froch was a monster and a lot of his toughness was not born to him but grown cause he trained extremely hard and had the running schedule of a horse.
try to do the same thing in soccer, or tennis good luck.

 

There isn’t.

The only issue that Maradona would have, is that he’d have to be more dedicated and not binge on cocaine.

The versions of Diego that dragged a mediocre Napoli side to 2 titles in the 80’s, would be worth a staggering amount today.

I’ve seen him do things with a ball that even Messi etc couldn’t do.

As long as he could stay fit and healthy, he’d be one of the best players on the planet.

Go and look at his ability. And consider that he was brutalised by defenders and played on pitches that are nowhere near the level of what we see today.

Today, the overall game is quicker. But he’d be able to fit perfectly in today’s game.

 

That is simply not true. There's a reason why marketers are paid as much as they are.

You need not look further than world records in track and field. I have made a short list. I would be here all day if it was a comprehensive list.

Men's 100m and 200m sprint - both 11 years old.
Women's 100m and 200m sprint - both 32 years old.
Women's 400m - 35 years old.
Women's 800m - 37 years old.
Men's 400m - 4 years old.
Men's 800m - 8 years old.
Men's 1000m - 21 years old.
Men's 1500m - 22 years old.
Men's 1 mile - 21 years old.
Men's 3000m - 24 years old.
Men's 10,000m - 15 years old.
Men's 110m hurdles - 8 years old.
Men's 400m hurdles - 28 years old.
Men's high jump - 27 years old.
Men's long jump - 29 years old.
Women's long jump - 32 years old.
Women's triple jump - 25 years old.
Men's triple jump - 25 years old.
Men's shot put - 30 years old.
Men's discus throw - 34 years old.
Men's hammer throw - 34 years old.
Men's javelin throw - 24 years old.

It's similar in swimming.

 

Other sports rely more on athletic performance than boxing does. Which is why some sports progress decade by decade.

Boxing doesn’t do that. Because the fights are decided more by skill than athletic performance.

We know that the sprinters of the 90’s couldn’t beat today’s sprinters.Yet there’s fighters from 50 years ago who could beat some guys today, depending on how they matched up with them stylistically.

The start of the 90’s was now THIRTY YEARS AGO.

(I won’t go back any longer as it would hurt your brain)

Thirty years is a long time.

So it’s like you: Very simple.

Are today’s fighters as a whole, better than the best guys of the 90’s?

The answer is: NO.

Let’s quickly look at some of the divisions:

The HW’s, LMW’s, WW’s, MW’s and SMW’s back then, were clearly superior to what we currently have in in terms of overall ability and depth. So clear that you could tell even if you were blindfolded.

That’s FIVE divisions.

FIVE divisions where there has been ZERO PROGRESSION in almost THIRTY YEARS.

Yet we’re supposed to believe that the fighters have to be getting better each decade, because the sprinters and the swimmers are becoming faster each decade?

No.

The sport of boxing simply ebbs and flows.

The current CW division is thriving.

The current SMW division is dead.

There’s great fighters in each era.

Today’s fighters are not the greatest fighters of all time.

Anybody who thinks that needs a mercy killing.

 

Your premise is false.

 

Boxing cant be as technique depended then other sports. The simple fact that they are people that started boxing at age 20 or even 22 and became world champions is the simple proof that you are wrong.

it is impossible and i mean impossible to become a soccer pro at age 21 let alone a world champion when you never played soccer before in your life.

 

Those are special fighters.

Now look at their rivals in each of their divisions and then compare it to other eras.

Today’s HW division has Tyson Fury who is exceptional. But are his rivals all of the same calibre?

No.

You can’t say that today’s era of HW’s is the greatest of all time because you think Tyson Fury is great.

List today’s top 10 HW’s.

Compare them to the best 10 HW’s from the 80’s and 90’s, from 30-40 years ago.

Are today’s HW’s head and shoulders better than the HW’s of those eras?

No.

Go and look at some of the old Ring ratings for the HW division of the early 90’s.

Just because Tyson is uniquely special and he could hold his own in other eras, it doesn’t mean that the rest of the other HW’s could. Guys like: Wilder, AJ, Ruiz, Whyte, Povetkin etc.

Those guys are no better than: Evander, Holmes, Tyson, Wlad, Vitali and Lewis etc.

 

Well… not exactly!

The oldest individual world record for men is 12 years old (2008, Michael Phelps, 400m medley)
The oldest individual world record for women is 11 years old (2009, Federica Pellegrini, 200m freestyle)

Of a combined (men + women) 34 world records, 21 are between 1 and 5 years old!

 

George lived in an era where players weren’t athletes and did pretty much what they pleased. That can’t be denied. However, if George was brought forward and he changed his lifestyle and got himself into peak physical condition, could he compete? Yes. He’d be one of the best players in the world. Skill will always be skill. Balance and timing will always be balance and timing.

It’s nothing to do with longing for nostalgia

That training clip of Dempsey is him stretching out and winding down.

Nobody believes he fought like that where he rested his head on the bag.

We have enough footage of him to show who he really was.

I’d favour Dempsey over some of today’s guys, with his style, power and his explosiveness.

What are we going to be saying in 20 years time?

Are we going to be laughing at the notion that Mike Tyson could compete, by saying that his prime was 50 years ago?

I don’t get these fans.

They decide hypothetical match ups based on a fighters D.O.B. without focusing on the stylistic match ups.

Okay. Some people are nostalgic. They do look at things ometimes with rose coloured glasses. I know they do. But nobody is telling me that a peak version of Muhammad Ali couldn’t compete at HW today, on the grounds that a sprinter from the 60’s would be blown away by a sprinter from today. Not a chance. The two things are in no way comparable.

 

As always, you’ve made me laugh out loud again.

Ha!

But we need you serious for a minute, otherwise some of these guys are going to think you’re serious.

We know that some people are nostalgic and show bias etc. It happens all throughout the world on a daily basis. But knowledgeable boxing fans know for sure that boxing simply does not progress each decade like some other sports do.

We know that fights are determined by skill, and that the outcome of any fight would be determined by how the fighters matched up stylistically, and not when they were born.

We both know that Mike Tyson would wreck a guy like Deontay Wilder based on how their styles would mesh, despite the fact that Mike was born in 1966 and we’re now in 2020.

 

Okay. Then let’s stick with the 90’s if you’re familiar with guys from that era.

If you want to, you could say that the further you go back, the less overall quality you would see.

You can have that opinion. But what about coming forward from the 90’s?

The decade of the 90’s is now approaching 30 years ago.

30 years is a sufficient amount of time in any sport.

Where’s the overall improvement today?

Nobody watches boxing from the 90’s, and thinks to themselves:

“Those fighters are nowhere near the level of today’s guys”

It’s actually the opposite, especially in the lower divisions.

There has been no noticeable progression.

There’s many divisions today that aren’t as strong as they were back then.

There’s fighters of today who aren’t as good as some fighters of that decade.

And when you realise that, it just shatters any theory that the sport has to keep evolving because other sports have.

 

If you had a time machine and you made a HUGE tournament with today’s guys along with all the greats of the past, you would end up with a huge list of mixed results.

Whoever doesn’t understand that, doesn’t deserve to be a fan of the sport.

There’s so much ignorance in this forum it’s staggering. (I’m obviously not referring to yourself)

 

Yeah, it just ebbs and flows and has done for years.