How would 21st century training, nutrition 'n PEDs improved ATGs?

I need help with that...my sense of sight is a bit busted.

Please show me enough examples to support your generalized argument...and by that I dont mean 2 mins of grainy film you saw on youtube.

I mean full fights...then we can compare them to modern day examples.

 

Good post. :good

 

I dont think your assessment of Hopkins is very fair enquirer considering his age. Hes also a very healthy man that stays in shape year round, but I agree Calzahge carried himself the same way. These guys preserve their bodies work out year round and stay away from partying and drugs. I believe alot of the old timers were the same, but more because they were fighting two three times a month.
The fighters of today want to fight every six months and balloon up and party between fights. The use of drugs and intensive strength and conditioning programs probably helps cover up their slack. Its basically a cover up for their laziness.

 

If you'd followed the thread cretin you would see I initially claimed better nutrition/supplements/training leads to various improvements in performance, not just lower bodyfat. Someone called me when I claimed more modern fighters were ripped and hence I proved my point. Ofcourse there are far more issues in boxing

Don't call me biased because you haven't got the intelligence to follow a conversation, ****wit

The evolution in the HWs is visable in them being bigger, stronger and more durable

 

No, you never actually got past the assertion stage. Nothing was proved either way.
Not that it matters.
I think there were just as many ripped fighters back in the day as there are now, you think otherwise. Neither of us proved ****.

I do not disagree with you on the point that the supplements etc. make it easier (or simpler) though. But that could just suggest that the old-timers worked a bit harder, or with more trial and error, to achieve the same results.

 

The thing about old timers is they'd find tactics to conserve energy. Whether it was taking a round off, never pushing their body to a stage where they are too breathless, starting slower, resting in the clinches. Also when your opponent is tiring and pacing himself it lowers the pace for you

Another things to bare in mind is allot of the fighters we see are highlights, it misrepresents the pace of the fight. Also many didnt fight that many 15rounders, someone brought up the fact Tunney for 1 only went 15rounds about 4 times

 

If it was a court of law I would get the verdict, I'm picking fighters more ripped than the 1s you picked from the past 2 years, your picking fighters over a 70year period and find a handful.

You just agreed with a ****wit post, which I think is the second time you've done that on this thread, it doesnt strengthen your case, it makes you look dumb

 

I think this as well, but I also think these new techniques help older fighters the most, and thats why were seeing more compete later into their careers at the elite level.

 

enquirer is right to point out that some of the best modern fighters train in an almost completely "old school" manner.

Also, people are saying the old-school is "pre-70s" or "pre-80s" but the open-mindedness in training and any steps towards a "modern" sports-science approach to training came in the late 1980s, and that was among a minority.
As for nutritional supplements that might actually work well, we are talking mid-to-late 90s.

I mean, Hearns and Leonard were "old school" in 1981. A prime Tyson was "old school". Marvin Hagler was "old school", very much so. And even some of the best around today are more "old school" than not.

Obviously, the DRUGS are a different matter though. Boxers have been taking injections and drugs for the larger part of the last 100 years.

 

PP,i have followed the entire thread. Its obvious that you are a boy that has to resort to ad homineum And asserting UNPROVEN statements.
You aint proved ****,and like i said you just make excuses like 'oh the highlights' dont show the whole story'.
Well,how would do YOU know the highlights dont show the whole story if you werent there to see the original??????? If you cant answer that,it shows your biased,which what i said originally.
ps; if we were in court,youd be up for contempt, and the judge would probably tell you to shut up and listen to the 'EVIDENCE'...

 

If it was a court of law you'd be doing your time for crimes against common sense a long time ago.

Yes, but to my credit, I've disagree with several ****wit posts on this thread.
Posts which you yourself are responsible for.

 

I think you would be suprised of how many of the best modern fighters do in fact use strength and conditioning coaches now. There was a video I was looking for on youtube interviewing Freddie Roach, and he pretty much talks about the whole issue and how he wasnt a believer at first and now he advises all his fighters to get on a program along with their boxing training.

 

Leftthook,Dont get me wrong,some types of guys can benefit enormously from modern techniques,coaches,supplements et al. What i am saying is that it all depends on the INDIVIDUAL. It depends on what works for the individual.
If modern training helps a guy to get stronger,fight for longer,make weight easier then thats great. If old school training benefits a guy better,then thats cool as well. I know shane mosley semmed to be better before he started with weights and supplements,and i cant think of many modern guys that got better because of a conditioning coach. (with the exception of holyfield.)
What annoys me,is those either saying old school absolutely is best,or new school is absolutely better,thats just biased crap. Whatever works best for the said fighter is best...

 

I agree with that as well and I think a good balance of both is whats really helping some of these fighters and why a lot of the top trainers are now buying into the whole strength and conditioning programs.

 

Yes, but a "strength and conditioning coach" is not a magician or wizard. He's just paid to do his job, a job that needs to be done. Some are worth their pay more than others, no doubt.
Lennox Lewis's conditioning coach was his friend from school.
Of course a seperate conditioning coach is a good thing, especially from the point of view of someone like Roach.
But there's always been something like that, with assistant trainers etc.

Let's be honest, did Mike Tyson in his prime need someone other than Kevin Rooney to get him into great condition ? I dont think so.
Of course, Tyson was genetically gifted, and for some others the input of more than one professional will be beneficial. But it really is not rocket science.
The vast majority of these strength and conditioning coaches aren't doing anything amazing, they are just doing the same old job that's always been done. Some are true experts who can work wonders, and others are complete disasters ......... and the majority are just what we used to call "trainers".