Has the Classic forum learned anything in the old vs modern debate?

Hoping for a come-from-behind KO is not a wiining strategy. Kovalev might put Marciano in the infirmary first.

 

I, conversely, find it a bit hard to understand why it should be so crazy to think that the best today that weighs about what Rocky did could be competitive with him. Maybe Kovalev wouldn't be, but he's one of the best in the last 10 years weighing about what Rocky did (185-190 lbs on fight night - and perhaps he would have been more around 195 if he didn't have to make weight) so I can't he saw how the thought would be so laughable.

 

Kov couldn`t have knocked out Walcott with one punch.

 

Because I don't see Kovalev beating a bigger harder hitting guy with THAT gas tank.

Ok, let's be fair. He might do it over 8.

Anything over that and I'd put money on Marciano.

 

I don’t know how to answer the question posed atop this thread — how can a group of somewhat ever-changing people (they come and go) collectively learn anything?

Fighters, like other athletes, are suited to their eras and the way the sport was structured and officiated. Today’s speedy NFL wideouts aren’t built so much for the days when DBs could make contact all the way down the field and you had to fight your way free rather than run past someone who can’t impede you, for instance.

Boxers of long-ago eras were suited to the way the sport worked then. Today’s 169-pounds-in-the-ring welterweights would be crushed if they had to weigh in on the day of the fight and yesterdays true 147-pounders would be overwhelmed (or fight at lightweight) under today’s rules.

But one thing, off topic-ish, that I do believe (and I’m as guilty as the next guy) is that the fighters you grew up with tend to be the ones you favor. I’m a boxing child of the 1970s/early 1980s with an appreciation for the ‘60s guys and I believe on the whole I favor guys from that era — I don’t think Milton McCrory beats Ray Robinson but I believe Leonard and Hearns give him all he could handle and may, in fact, have been better.

 

Only if he has a baseball bat.

 

We are the Borg.

Prepare to be assimilated.

Resistance is futile.

This content is protected

 

I would rather not comment on this subject.

 

Maybe, but millennials believe the world began in 2001. Nothing before that date, especially nothing in BLACK AND WHITE, can possibly be better than the Paul Brothers.

 

I see a lot about people believing we fans just favor the boxers from our youth. If that was true, my top three heavyweights would be from the 30's and 40's. My top three are: 1. Muhammad Ali (1960-1981, so I was 36-57 when he boxed), 2. Joe Louis (1934-1951, so I was 10-27 when he boxed, so he counts as in my youth), 3. Evander Holyfield (1984-2011, so I was 60-87 when he boxed). I don't think 1 of 3 supports the narrative often given here that we all favor the boxers from our youth. Only Joe's career was from my youth.

As an aside example, my Granddaughter, who was born in 1974, names Joe Louis as the greatest Heavyweight who ever lived (way before she was born). She has Muhammad Ali as #2 (started before she was born and retired when she was about 7). She has Larry Holmes at #3 (1973-2002, so she was not born when he started and 28 when he retired, so in her youth). Again, only 1 of 3 from her youth.

IMHO, I think most of us (hard core fans and boxing history lovers) try to be subjective in our views.

I know I don't care about WHEN they fought; I care about HOW they fought.

 

I feel inclined to comment on your lack of comment on his comment about having no comment on the situation.

That’s all I have to say about it.