Was the 80s actually stronger than the 70s heavyweight era

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MarkusFlorez99, Nov 2, 2025.


  1. MarkusFlorez99

    MarkusFlorez99 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,224
    17,210
    Jan 13, 2021
    80s: Holmes, Tyson, Witherspoon, Spinks, Dokes, Cooney, Thomas, Tucker, Smith, Tubbs, Bruno, Coetzee, Page, Berbick, Ruddock, Weaver, Williams, Snipes

    70s: Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Frazier, Norton, Quarry, Lyle, Young, Bugner, Shavers, Bonavena, Ellis, Chuvalo, Bobick, Patterson, Wepner, Mathis

    They look pretty close to me, 70s is more top heavy but 80s has better contenders and fringe contenders. Someone like Randall Cobb would've breached the top 10 easily if he fought in the 70s, he was better than Chuck Wepner and about as good as Chuvalo
     
    Sangria, Jakub79 and BCS8 like this.
  2. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,372
    25,802
    Jan 3, 2007
    There may be some degree of truth that the 80s were a tad deeper once you got past the top 3 or 4 of both eras.

    But it’s hard for me to make a blanket statement either way. What makes it complicated when comparing ENTIRE decades to one another is that each individual YEAR can vary so drastically from one another. Take the heavyweight ring ratings from 1973 for example. That year was absolutely packed with super stars where as 1979 not as much. The 80s had a mix of good and mediocre years as well. Also, just because you have a lot of top “ names” in the top ten within a given year doesn’t mean it’s as strong as it looks . Sometimes a lot of those top ten guys were past prime or still too green. We see examples like this all over
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2025
  3. catchwtboxing

    catchwtboxing Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,102
    37,742
    Jul 4, 2014
    Each thread more brilliant than that last.

    You are comparing a group of fatties, drug addicts, fatty drug-addicts, serial-duckers and mediocrities to an era of some of the greatest to ever do it, all of whom fought each other. Seriously, if you were trying to fail, it is hard to see what you would be doing differently.
     
    dmt, swagdelfadeel, bboyrei and 2 others like this.
  4. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    61,262
    81,767
    Aug 21, 2012
    I think the two eras are pretty close.
     
    Sangria and Jakub79 like this.
  5. HistoryZero26

    HistoryZero26 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,043
    4,366
    Jan 6, 2024
    In terms of backwards depth the 80s is stronger. But the 80s doesn't have an advantage until you get to like 15 or 20. If you compare the top 20s or top 30s its hard to pick the 80s because its not like the 70s drops off a cliff once you leave the top 10. The 70s still has guys like Kirkman and Bobick who never fought for belts.

    This depth you speak of doesn't apply to the whole 80s either. The mid to late 80s was much better than the first few years. Those 3 or 4 years might be the worst the divisions ever been. Holmes fought better opponents but Marcianos overall division was better.

    The 35-45 period isn't a decade but thats the HW "10 year bloc" with the best case to pass the 70s because that division was 100 eliteish fighters deep. Without WW2 Louis had enough serious potential opponents to get to 50 title defenses.
     
    Sangria likes this.
  6. AntonioMartin1

    AntonioMartin1 Jeanette Full Member

    5,295
    4,360
    Jan 23, 2022
    The problem is the 70s had Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, Quarry, Wepnet, and to a lesser extent, Light Heavyweight champion Foster.

    The 80s had Holmes, M. Spinks, Tyson, Foreman, Holyfield, Cooney, Witherspoon, and to a lesser extent Bruno, Coetzee and cocaine. lots of cocaine.
     
    Sangria, Saintpat and young griffo like this.
  7. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,226
    13,252
    Jan 4, 2008
    The most obvious difference is that the 70's guys had better consistency and longevity. Don't know who would win a big tournament.
     
  8. PrimoGT

    PrimoGT Active Member Full Member

    1,302
    1,217
    Jul 20, 2025
    I don't think so.
    I think 1980s was stronger than 1990s though.
     
    Sangria and Jakub79 like this.
  9. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    62,300
    47,364
    Feb 11, 2005
    Yes. I've said so for decades.
     
    Sangria and MarkusFlorez99 like this.
  10. Cojimar 1946

    Cojimar 1946 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,818
    1,765
    Nov 23, 2014
    Is 1990 technically part of the 80s since there is no year zero?

    That would help the 80s because you would then have Bowe and Mercer

    What's the best 70s heavyweight people would favor 80s Foreman over?
     
    Sangria likes this.
  11. young griffo

    young griffo Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,518
    7,310
    May 18, 2006
    No. If you lived through the 80’s watching alphabet titles swap hands due to poor conditioning, drug habits, half hearted efforts and half arsed training you wouldn’t even consider this premise.

    Most of these fighters made their reps beating each other In lackadaisical fights that only proved one guy was less fat or unfit or lazy on the night. It’s why Tyson rode roughshod over these flakes.

    Hipster revisionism basically. Now the 90’s was a contender for the 70’s in terms of depth, quality and performance.
     
  12. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra H2H Burger King

    10,714
    18,449
    Jan 6, 2017
    This.

    The 80's had plenty of talent. Many of them had power, speed, technique, ring IQ, good jabs, good footwork, or some combination of all of the above. On average, they had as much raw talent as nearly any era.

    The problem was so many of them were ****ing slackers, had drug problems, weight problems, inactivity and legal issues, etc, and many failed to face each other. It didn't help we saw the sanctioning bodies start their BS splitting up the titles and promoters like King and Arum arguing with each other or having cold wars. The 80's COULD have been just as strong as the 70's, but they never really managed to reach their full potential.
     
    swagdelfadeel, Bokaj, OddR and 3 others like this.
  13. PrimoGT

    PrimoGT Active Member Full Member

    1,302
    1,217
    Jul 20, 2025
    No. "EIGHTIES" does not include "NINETY". The non-existence of a year 0 doesn't have any bearing on that.
     
  14. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,399
    10,901
    Jul 28, 2009
    You know what's weird is if you mix, thoroughly and equally mix, high fructose corn syrup with cocaine powder, you will deeply distort the quality of athletic potential you are dealing with. To which you are dealing. Of which-...I don't speak English as a first language. I don't know it well. But I know what I'm trying to say. It reminds me of a quote from Don Draper. Happiness is just a moment before you need more happiness. And that's what the eighties were about, more than many decades.