Where do you Draw the Line of what are reasonable arguments between eras?

We often debate how well guys can compete between eras.
Advancements in training, science, a larger pool, PEDs...vs tougher times, frequent fights & fierce competition, old school techniques...

At least we should acknowledge that no one era's rule set or habits are intrinsically better or more legitimate.
Unless we are talking about something like a lotta cheatin' like with drugs or constant clinching, you gotta compare people under either neutralized environments, or fight under both sets of circumstances.

It always bothers me that we compare across divisions when the guys who have day before weigh ins tend to be substantially larger.
At least we should consider in ring actual weight.
Although for the HWs, what that means has changed as the numbers shift & guys get bigger.

So at least I would say it is unrealistic to think anyone who is the size of a modern LHW, like Marciano & Dempsey in the late 180's, is gonna be able to dominate like they did if reincarnated or we send more recent guys back in time.
It is just not plausible that guys relying on power & attrition will be as good-we do not even know if they would ponetially be top HWs-they would likely need to downgrade their divisions, & it is pure speculation if some could add muscle & retain enough of their special characteristics to do very well at HW.

The lowest size where it might be plausible seems early 200's, a Frazier or Louis...
Even then it is difficult to beat the very best from the last 2 generations.

On the other hand, there are extreme opinions like this one about a man who was 210-215 at his peak, more when having career defining victories, & did not rely on brute power...

"the only success i can see him get for his stature and style in the modern division is hit and run on a carefully padded record with cherry picked names that couldnt expose him. And even then I can barely see him even reaching top 30. Imagen a worse version of Hughie Fury. Thats it.the only success i can see him get for his stature and style in the modern division is hit and run on a carefully padded record with cherry picked names that couldnt expose him. And even then I can barely see him even reaching top 30. Imagen a worse version of Hughie Fury. Thats it."
​

So some think he is the GOAT, & this revisionism thinks that because his style is not well replicated (true for many unique past greats), in honest matchmaking he would be at best a Journeyman. If that.
Consider that any fighter gets to practice under current conditions. If brought back, is this analyses within the

This content is protected

of plausible scenarios?

You can vote here & expand upon it below, Whaddya Thunk?

 

I've always thought Louis was the template for old changing to new.
I also think he's the best combination punching Heavyweight ever with absolutely beautiful moves.
I firmly believe boxing like any other sport evolves and even though I love the fighters from the 30's and 40's I don't think they can compete with modern ones.

But Hughie Fury......I saw him in a European title fight and he threw a right uppercut with the back of his hand facing him, absolutely awful technique and his brother is awful to watch too.

 

Are you talking about the heavyweights... or boxers in general?

 

Boxers in general.

 

there is no reason to believe Louis or Ali would not be great in every era
it is unreasonable to belief they would not be

 

boxing has evolved so boxers fight less & take less punishment
not so they fight better

it is significantly important evolution.

 

Alright man that is fine, but it seems you did not register a vote!
Tell us how strong you feel by voting for one of the 2 options that may best define your position!

 

no
I don't quite understand the wording of poll options

 

It's all hit and not get hit. Louis was good at that and he would do the same today decades later.

 

Donald Curry had 400 amateur fights some of the old timers had none.

 

my belief is facts

 

Don Curry boxed 40 years ago

what is an old timer?

 

It is tongue in cheek, one says Ali & fighters of his level would very likely still be great.

The other option relevant to the opinion you expressed essentially says that anyone who believes otherwise should be committed to an Insane Asylum, so outrageous is their separation from reality.

 

Kid McCoy, Jim Jeffries, Owen Moran, George Dixon, Jack Johnson, Jimmy Wilde, Stanley Ketchel.
Curry was still a champion in the later 80's, it isn't that long ago.

 

yes & nowadays boxers do box less

we still have boxers who have 350 amateur fights
but generally boxers have less fights

the thread refer to Ali and Louis . Ali was boxing as late as early 1980s

my point is yes evolution happen in boxing & the safety elements is main & important significant change