New vs Old

Good post ! With which, I agree :good

 

I seems every post of yours is a treasure. :good

 

That post says it all. When it comes to Boxing, all the bs about "modern" training and supplements etc. doesn't mean anything. Maybe if we're talking about running or swimming or weightlifting then yeah, modern training and supplementation probably plays a significant role. But as one trainer once said, "You can't compare fighting to other sports". Using a nautilis machine or any other type of modern training equipment is no better than chopping wood or rowing a boat or any of the various old time conditioning methods used by the ATG's. Long live "Old School"!

 

I have always been a consistent advocate of the notion that a good or great fighter is simply a good or great fighter, though i do accept evolution in terms of technique at some level. I don't know if i i've read certain posts properly but if i have then some posters do not believe that Robinson would be the ultimate fighter in terms of effectveness then i will happily wax lyrical on why i believe he is. It's been a while, we all need our fix.

 

TeetoRead your reply,and I have seen the immortal Ray Robinson in his glorious prime thre times ringside...first in 1943 ,when Ray toyed with a fading but still tough Henry Armstrong,than in1945, MSG ,Robinson obliterated a real tough Californian, Jimmy McDaniels in two rounds with a flurry of every punch in the book,right on the button.This wasw the PRIME Robinson, then 24 years old...The last Robinson fight was Sept 12 ,1951 Polo Grounds When cut very badly over his eye,he caught Randy Turpin,with every ounce of strengh he had left knocking out a strong and awkward Randy Turpin...Unfortunately todays boxing fans are left with films over a PAST prime Robinson,still better than most every other boxer of his time, but not the real addition of Sugar Ray Robinson....BY FAr the best fighter of my times...P4p Twice the skills of Ali, I am convinced....

 

That's amazing.

 

Yeah that's one thing i really like about boxing then compared to boxing now, personally. Back then a fighter learned his trade inside out, thoroughly, because he would fight so often, and losses could be seen as a learning curve. I favour it over today's boxing world plenty. But boxing is always great regardless.

On Robinson. Well it's a combination of things. You see how often he fought, and his level of competition, and he never lost. Just once in his prime, which he avenged four times before moving up in weight officially to do so again. Then there's the film of him. The vast majority of what we have is the great man past his prime and just look how ridiculously good he looks. We used to all have that thought in the back of our minds, 'the footage we have of him can't be much different to what he'd look like in his pomp;, then that 1946 footage hit youtube and it's just wow. We really have been denied unreal level performances with there not being more of prime Robinson for us to watch. So much of a shame.

I made a thread months ago on why he just simply had more than Leonard in my opinion. I'll try and dig it out.

 

I will repeat the often put argument:

The advance in records in track and field, swimming etc are irrelevant because boxing is not an athletic sport.

In any era, you will get some great boxers who are great athletes, and some great boxers who are crap athletes (crap as in barely better than average).

It is by no means certain that boxers from a later era will be better athletes than boxers from an earlier era. For example Jim Jeffries was a much better athlete than Joe Frazier, because he was a world class athlete in his era, while you could find a guy on this forum who was a better all round athlete than Joe Frazier.

 

Yeah, nice post. The overriding factor is simply how good a fighter you are. It's simple. If you're very good at boxing/fighting the you are good at it. That's that imo. Doesn't matter when.

 

Another thing to note.

We have probably all noticed that a guy who is well practiced in a martial art under tightly controled circumstances, will often do badly in a street fight.

A good streetfighter might get nowhere in boxing or another matrial art, but if he has discipline and can channel his reflexes into it, then he might be prety darn good verry quickly.

Now there have been a lot of former brawlers who have been total busts in boxing but some have been transformed into absolute monsters.