...yeah,because Freddie Roach, Manny Stewart, bro Nazim etc,know nothing about boxing! This article is incredibly biased. Are we supposed to believe that Roy Jones didnt know how the throw a left hook?
physically the fighters are stronger today, thats a fact. and ducking is not a recent invention, dempsey ducked a whole race...
OK but tyson didnt get hit that much and his fights didnt last that long. and refs dont always stop the fight quicker, look at jones lebedev or pacquiao margarito.
yeah those 2 fights definitely should have been stopped sooner, but in general fighters get protected more. I dont see how more fighting when younger is a bad idea, I think the most serious damage happens when boxers are shot and continue fighting, like holyfield and jones are doing right now, are what ali did after the thrilla in manilla.
I saw this yesterday and I agree with everything but the left hooks portion, that's bull**** man. Since frazier we've seen incredible left hooks from Duran, Leonard, Jones, Tyson, Morrison, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Mayweather Jr., and many others...
agreed, those boxers shouldnt get a license. but its not like young boxers can take unlimited punishment either, they have to protect their health to make money.
What does strength have to due with technique ? So what if most of the boxers of today are stronger if they can't box worth **** ?
with all this scientific stuff around i doubt that todays training methods produce inferior technicians.
no, im just not biased towards old school fighters. every sport evolves and produces better athletes, why should boxing be any different?
Better athletes, sure. But a boxer isn't just an athlete, he's a martial artist. Boxing's not just a sport that is dominated by physical characteristics.. It's about mindset and mental ability and skillset as much or more than physical attributes. If you spar less, you fight less, you're matched easier with less adversity... You won't become a better fighter.
Same could be said for all sports. Outside of straight athletics, all sports have lots of intricate skills. Skills also evolve. A modern NBA team would destroy one from the mid 70s not just because of improved physicality but also the skills have improved. Same in soccer,rugby etc.
I will keep on saying this until the day I die. Im tired of these guys trying to make the 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's and etc like the best fighters came out. I completely disagree and no fighters from those eras would have been able to accomplish what they did in those years if they began their careers in the 80's and after. No way Robinson and Archie would have been able to do what they did in their time and reach 200 fights and win all those multiple weight divisions the way they did in their time.
I'm not qualified to comment on the NBA. I will say though that the size difference between the 70's and now makes playing at the top level completely different. The same is not true for boxing apart from the heavies, though. And you didn't mention anything about the experience gap in terms of fights and opposition stuff either. You get good at things by practicing right? So how on ****ing earth can Maravilla fight 3x a year at the championship level compared to someone like Harry Greb(45 fights in 1919, including 2 MW champs, 3 LHW champs former past and present, and a huge range of top 5 contenders from middle to heavy and never losing in the process)? No amount of modern nutrition or training speculations about ability can overcome that gap in resume and experience a schedule like that would bring. You say 'skills have evolved'. Well, there's no way to empirically measure that. And as far as athleticism and training go, they're great. But unless you have the skill and experience and mental game to exploit them, they're only so useful. Just look at Pascal and Hopkins..