Myth: champs of the past wouldn't be champs if USSR had been able to compete

If they don't give a rat's ass about who the 126 or 140 lb titleholder is, they aren't serious boxing fans. They're casual sports fans, not casual boxing fans.

 

Europe combined has less champions than Mexico. How can it get more lopsided.

The super middleweight ring champ is American. Lightheavyweight. American. Cruiser. Cuban. And since fast Eddie had moved down he has a great shot at unifying.

You have he Klits at heavyweight and then what after?

How's the Klitsckos crossover appeal going?

 

If Im not mistaken Maskeav was managed by Dennis Rappaport and the very first Russions were brought ove by Top Rank so poor management/money/camps isn't an excuse unless you can show links to prove otherwise. Maskeav in all likelyhood was matched against McCall because Oliver was coming off a loss and I know for a fact was deeply into ctack at that time. There was an article (maybe Sports Illustrate or one of the boxing scribes) where McCall tell how he celebrate his first defense over Holmes getting high in a Las Vegas crack house shortly after the fight. I have no doubt boxing insiders were already aware of this.

 

i cant help but think threads like this one has a racit edge to them..forget the hate..we all bleed red.,

 

Absurd hyperbole like that attributed to some of the people reading your thread isn't going to help your argument.

Addressing your less silly, more general myth claim in the title, it's an obvious but untestable likelihood that if the USSR had participated in international professional sports there would historically have been fewer American champs. How many? No way to know, but that is what is bound to happen when you open a sport to around 300 million additional people (approximate population towards the end of the USSR.)

Do I think Americans would have been totally dominated in the ring by Soviet fighters for the last 40+ years preceding the fall had they been allowed to compete? No, but to think some of them wouldn't stop a few American contenders on their way to the top is just common sense, just as Americans would stop some Soviet fighters from rising to the championship.

Don't let it bother you when people exaggerate about unprovable "if's." All we can do is assume that some things would indeed have been different, but as no one can know just how different, who cares?

 

It isn't not a myth. The landscape would have been different with fighters all over the world not just USSR. Even in Germany pro boxing gained reputation in the past 20 years.

Having said that, I am not claiming Ali or SRL wouldn't have been champions. Yet, times would have been harder for them.

 

People forget that Americans were doing pretty damn good with winning Olympic medals in boxing during that era as well. Ali = Gold medal, Foreman = Gold, Frazier = Gold

 

Hold on. If soviets, and Polish, and East Germans had been fighting, they would have made it much tougher, and would have won some titles. Ray Robinson-why bring him up, he fought in time when Iron Curtain was not up yet?


All the Russians and others who competed in Olympics and won medals would have turned pro, but could not, and all the runners up would have entered pro ranks. Some would go pro early, instead, none could. Imagine no Klitschkos, no Kosta Tzyu, Adamak, and every other champ or contender of past 20 years not being around?

 

Yes, but after olympics a lot of guys who did not make olympics would have turned pro, they stayed amateur, or retied instead.

 

George Foreman could not last 7 rounds against anyone good when younger.