A question for those who use athletics as the argument for modern fighters.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011.


Page 1 of 2
  1. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    We always here about how modern nutrition advanced things and how old timers cannot compete. And how if you look at any sport (well not including billiards anyway) then you will see that the times always get faster and there are no fighters from the 20s or 30s who could match todays fighters because running times prove it.

    while this has been i think explained numerous times, there is one inconsistency which hasnt been explained. of those who use this method of justification, 90 per cent of them have Muhammed Ali as their no 1. The top 10 will nearly always contain Frazier, Foreman and Holmes. Now i looked it up the other day and i found that the longest standing running record was from some lady in the 1980s. And this was probably some east german where lady might be debateable, the longest standing mens record is probably much shorter and from the 90s. At least most records seem to be from the 90s or 2000s.

    So my point being that if this modern nutrition evolution theory does in fact hold valid, what in the world leads anyone to think that a fighter from the ancient 60s/70s like Ali, Frazier or Foreman could actually compete against guys in the current day? They cant in any other sport so why can they in Boxing? I believe that is the rationale used agaisnt the old timers. Why are the 70s crowd any different?

    And if you consider that the old fat and past prime 70s boxers Holmes and Foreman beat many of the 90s boxers, it seems that realistically only the top few like Holyfield and Lewis and maybe Bowe could even hope to compete with todays fighters. So, with that being said, if you subscribe to this theory, shouldnt your top 10 list loook something like this:

    1. Wlad Klitchsko
    2. David Haye
    3. Thomas Adamek
    4 Vitali Klichsko (i put him this low because he actually lost to an Old Lewis even though he has improved since then).
    5. Russian Chagaev
    6. Nicolai Valuev
    7. Lennox Lewis
    8. Evander Holyfield
    9. Riddick Bowe
    10. Alexander Povetkin
     
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    #1
  2. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    This content is protected
     
    Swarmer, Apr 2, 2011
    Swarmer, Apr 2, 2011
    #2
  3. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,421
    26,891
    Feb 15, 2006
    The only people who aply the "development of the sport" argument either consistently or sincerely, are hardline Klitschko fans who favour the brothers over every fighter that went before.
     
    janitor, Apr 2, 2011
    janitor, Apr 2, 2011
    #3
  4. OBCboxer

    OBCboxer Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,948
    217
    Jun 2, 2007
    Athletes are better today. Unfortunately, Athleticism doesn't get you to the top in Boxing.
     
    OBCboxer, Apr 2, 2011
    OBCboxer, Apr 2, 2011
    #4
  5. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    i think you are right.
     
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    #5
  6. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    60,501
    44,344
    Feb 11, 2005
    I am not sure what "athleticism" is... However, I can attest to the fact that athletes are not jumping higher or farther than they were 25 years ago (Sjoberg and Lewis would still be the best in the world today at both the high and long jump). Also, sprint times since the late 80's to the present are very highly suspect and not a good barometer to the development of sport. And frankly, I don't think there has been as good a singular pure athlete than Sergei Bubka since his time. It seems as tho the mighty rise in athletes has peaked and the remaining ballyhoo is just that.
     
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    #6
  7. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Modern nutrition.
     
    bodhi, Apr 2, 2011
    bodhi, Apr 2, 2011
    #7
  8. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    It does seem that way, except for that Jamaican guy. But i dont follow the sport closely enough.

    Why is this so. Do you think that we have stopped evolving?

    Or do you think that the training for track and field has reached a professional level now, where there are only so many hours in the day for training and it cant be improved. If so, it is surely true that boxing reached that training peak many, many years earlier and have gone backwards in most areas in this regard. So much so that when told how guys used to train we often get met with comments like that is impossible he must be lying about distances he ran, or his body will fall apart if he does that. Even though clearly it must have been possible and his body mustnt of fell apart.
     
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    Boilermaker, Apr 2, 2011
    #8
  9. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    60,501
    44,344
    Feb 11, 2005
    "The Jamaican guy", tho a great talent, is starting to smell a little ripe... at least the whole Jamaican program. Still, he's almost an aberration in talent.

    As far as physically evolving, species do not evolve over a few generations, tho better nutrition and health care may make it seem so. I think a lot of the improvement in T&F from the 60's to the 90's was PED's and professionalism, i.e. "amateur" athletes getting subsidized to train more hours and not have jobs.
     
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    #9
  10. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Jamaica has absolutly no controll over illegal substances and no program for drug testing. IT´s easy for Jamaican athletes to dope but till no he wasn´t caught at the world championships or olympics thus he is innocent until this happens. Rellay an amazing talent.
     
    bodhi, Apr 2, 2011
    bodhi, Apr 2, 2011
    #10
  11. Kalasinn

    Kalasinn ♧ OG Kally ♤ Full Member

    18,318
    53
    Dec 26, 2009
    This content is protected


    Modern Nutrition. :yep
     
    Kalasinn, Apr 2, 2011
    Kalasinn, Apr 2, 2011
    #11
  12. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    jolt cola is that real ish.

    This content is protected
     
    Swarmer, Apr 2, 2011
    Swarmer, Apr 2, 2011
    #12
  13. thistle1

    thistle1 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,915
    151
    Jul 30, 2006
    people, the missing ingredient from past to present is not so much nutrition, is not so much modern training, is not so much sports science and developement (which is not as much a factor in boxing) it's...

    _ucken HARDMEN,

    that's right, real tough guys, street hard & tough, proper don't ever _uck with me hardmen.

    it's enviromental and even poverty today isn't as hard as it used to be,
    people today enjoy too many modern distractions, where as most (not all) but most past greats were proper enviromental _ucken hardmen...

    it's a times and place reality, along with top athletes/boxers and fighters combined!
     
    thistle1, Apr 2, 2011
    thistle1, Apr 2, 2011
    #13
  14. Kalasinn

    Kalasinn ♧ OG Kally ♤ Full Member

    18,318
    53
    Dec 26, 2009
    Modern Nutrition. :happy

    This content is protected
     
    Kalasinn, Apr 2, 2011
    Kalasinn, Apr 2, 2011
    #14
  15. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    60,501
    44,344
    Feb 11, 2005
    Drugs or no (and I think they all push the limits of doping) he is a once in a generation... or century talent. He just blows up the curve.

    Interesting tho that the 100 meter world record has improved roughly .4 of a second over the past 30 years, while the 800 meter world record (a much more difficult race to dope for according to some reports I have read) has only .7.
     
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    Seamus, Apr 2, 2011
    #15
Page 1 of 2