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

Jordan retired 20 years ago...there's no player currently better than him.
Wilt retired in 73, most of his records still stand today....

 

bro come on.
[url]https://www.google.de/amp/s/hoopshype.com/2016/03/11/why-nba-players-are-better-than-ever/amp/[/url]

think of all the additional talent you have. The balkan, eastern europe, china so much more athlets then back then.

 

ertwin,

Yes you are. You are trying to convince yourself that boxing simply has to progress each decade on the grounds that some other sports have.

Yes, boxing is a sport. But it’s a stand-alone sport. Because 2 guys fighting each other will always be 2 guys fighters each other.

Boxing is decided more on technique than athletic performance.

You can’t compare a group of sprinters recording times where you can win or lose by milliseconds, to two guys facing off in the centre of the ring, pitting their styles against one another.

Your brain tells you that because Usain Bolt could smoke a 70’s sprinter in the 100m, that it would be impossible for anyone to say that some fighters of the 70’s were better than some fighters of today.

You simply can’t comprehend it.

Better athletic performance gives an athlete a faster time running from point A to point B.

Boxing is more skill based, based on technique.

A physical game of chess.

The taller and heavier guy doesn’t always win.

The fastest guy doesn’t always win.

The fitter guy doesn’t always win.

The outcome of a fight is based on many different things.

NO. TODAY’S FIGHTERS ARE NOT THE BEST FOR NOW!

The current HW’s, LMW’s, WW’s, MW’s and SMW’s, aren’t better than the fighters that competed in those divisions THIRTY YEARS AGO.

Go and see for yourself.

Go through each division.

Watch some fighters of the past.

You are so ignorant it’s staggering.

Sports science do not win boxing matches.

Skills and strategy wins boxing matches.

I didn’t mention Mike being dropped into the 50’s mix.

What I said, was that if the footage we have of Mike from the 80’s, was actually from the 50’s, you would scoff at the notion that he could beat anyone today. And when asked why, you would simply say that it’s because the footage was over 60 years old. Because your brain is telling you that because a sprinter from 1950 couldn’t even compete today, then neither could a fighter. Because once again: You are ignorant.

If you asked me who would win a LHW match between Sergey Kovalev and Archie Moore, I’m not going to say Kovalev straight away because he’s a modern fighter. I’m going to analyse Moore and then give an objective opinion on how I think their styles would have matched up.

Now you can’t do that with other sports, because those other sports are based on data.

They’re based on times.

Numbers in black and white.

They’re not based on a guy out feinting someone in order to catch them off balance so they can counter.

They’re not based upon a guy landing a perfectly timed body shot.

They’re based on who ran from point A to B in the fastest time.

Only an idiot would even think about comparing running a race to fighting against another man.

Right, so if he could beat AJ, then hypothetically, why couldn’t a fighter with the exact same attributes from 45 years ago have also beaten him?

What’s the difference?

 

Yes, I’m a fan myself.

What evidence is there to form an opinion that he’d have walked through Marvin Hagler?

 

ertwin,

We’ve seen Wlad get taken out by smaller guys than himself.

That is correct. But that isn’t evidence that he couldn’t have been beaten by anybody smaller.

There’s loads of smaller HW’s who you could confidently pick to have beaten Wilder.

This debate has nothing to with nationalism.

I’m English.

 

Ok so we can compare mma then right? Mma has developed dramatically in the last 2 decades the fighters in prime wouldnt stand the chance against todays top ufc guys.
No i would seriously consider as a challenge for todays hw. But there is no footage from the 50s of some one doing this:

This content is protected

 

I said wlads reign not wlad.
I said few exception.
I highly doubt that there is any fighter below 6‘3 that could beat wilder.

Believe me no russian amateur trainer is talking about archie moore this is a very american thing.
The majority of boxing is dominated by eastern Europeans, brits and latinos and they just dont really care to much about the old guys.
You can enlighten me on the situation in england but most people will probably call this right now the golden era of british boxing. It doesnt seem like a lot of brits marvel in the old times too much.

 

the fact that golovkin had extra ordinary punching power:
List of fighters that only got koed by ggg:
Osuman
Murray
Monroe jr
Ishida
Rolls
Martirosyan

and i swear sturm, bjs andcanelo would be on this list too if they wouldnt have ducked golovkin.

 

I can’t comment on the MMA scene.

No, there’s nobody like Mike from the 50’s. But what I’m saying, is that if that footage of Mike here was from the 50’s or 60’s, and I posted you that same video, you would laugh that he could beat today’s guys. Because instead of comparing different styles, you are too fixated on data from completely different sports.

Now there’s no logical reason why Mike Tyson wouldn’t be able to beat some HW’s from the future.

It would be ignorant to look at the footage and then just assume that he wouldn’t be able to beat any of the top 10 HW’s from say 2050.

The difference between you and me is this:

I’m saying that it could be possible depending on how they would match up with him.

You are saying that it wouldn’t even be possible.

 

There’s many fighters throughout the history of the sport who could have beaten Wilder who were under 6’3.

The Golden era of British boxing? Ha!

Closing yourself up from the greats of the past would be completely ignorant.

A fighter can always add things to his arsenal.

Nobody is perfect.

 

Again, I’m a fan myself. But that is not evidence that he’d have walked through Marvin Hagler.

 

yeah of course their is no footage of someone doing this from the 50s cause you needed floyd patterson to develop mike tyson. Without frazier and patterson this tape would most likely never exist.
If you would show me fighters that looked like this in the 50s i would lf course consider them as capable of beating guys today.

 

You wouldn’t though.

The point is simple:

If you are open to thinking that a guy from the 80’s could have beaten a guy from today based upon his style, then there’s no reason why you can’t apply that same logic to other fighters.

If an 80’s HW could beat some HW’s today, then there’s so reason why a 70’s one couldn’t too.

You can apply the same logic across all divisions.

Now look what’s happened with you.

You have admitted that Mike could have beaten a guy from today.

Yet we know that a sprinter from the 80’s couldn’t have run faster than a sprinter today etc.

So why tie boxing in with any other sport?

Just appreciate the fact that due to the circumstances, the sport of boxing is unique.

If a fighter from the 80’s could beat a fighter from 2020, then there’s no logical reason why it wouldn’t be possible for him to be able to beat a boxer from 2050.

 

Does this also apply for a fighter from 90s of the 19th century?

 

I personally couldn’t go past a point that I wasn’t knowledgeable of. But if such footage existed and it was of quality, I’d analyse it before making an objective opinion.

I wouldn’t scoff at the notion of it like you would.