Boxers Are Getting Worse!!

Its only after getting completely owned by an entire board that someone is reduced to creating a thread like this. Sad.

 

Your logic is flawed, your opinions are skewed, and you're obviously immature.

Are Hearns, Duran, and Leonard dead? No, didn't think so.

By the way, with boxers improving immensely since the 1980s, do you think Hatton would be highly competitive with Hearns?

 

Nice thread

 

it isnt in the dictionary lil boy,therefore it isn't a word,you clearly have proven yourself the 'stupidest'.

 

Thread starter is bitter because he got sodomized too much for his liking in his last thread.

 

Roy Jones is greater than Floyd will ever be.

 

I agree that boxers have become better athletes just like in all other sports, but how does being a better athlete automatically make you great. Jim Brown is maybe the greatest athlete to ever live. He's in the football hall of fame and in the lacrosse hall of fame, but do you think he would win a fight against Ali in their primes because he is more athletic?

 

I somewhat agree with Southpaw. Older boxers are held on a almost unreachable pedestal here. And to even hint that a active boxer could beat an older ATG is grounds for clowning and ridicule around here. The fact is that nutrition and training has gotten much better and you can't deny that in other sports the older teams would be overmatched against teams of today. I won't say all the old ATG's would lose to today's fighters but I think that there are some in this era or the last that would beat them. To simply suggest that these current era boxers would have no chance is foolish IMO.

 

I doubt SouthPaw will understand this, judging from his threads he ain't to bright. But, athletes have gotten better, unfortunatley for your argument, back then all the great athletes were boxers, it was the biggest sport around. Today, there are some great athletes and great fighters, but they are few and far between, especially at the larger weights. But you are a complete idiot to discredit Robinson because of some losses and knockdowns. Floyd's a good fighter, but he also has had his opposition choosen for him very wisely. If he had fought the best guys out there he would have a much different win/loss ratio. And if he was fighting every 3 weeks like they did back in the day he'd have quite a few losses, not to mention his hands wouldn't last.

 

youre still here?
youre the Reggie Strickland of ESB.

 

southpaw i can see what your trying to say but it doesnt work like tha its stubid trying to comapre mayweather to suger ray

 

I like this guy haha..

 

Here is a great 2 cents worth.

Athletics, physicality. Speed, Endurance, Strength.
These are improving through science and economics. HOWEVER, the skillset has not changed much since the time of Robinson and Sugar Ray Leonard. You had the shoulder roll, etc.

My point is, today's society is driven by economics. Being a boxer is by choice, albeit for some a lucrative choice. The pure and simple money making that becomes inevitable when greatness is achieved is staggering. In the older days, fighters had to work TWICE or THREE TIMES as hard to make even half of what boxers make in such a monopolistic like world.

That being said, the fighters, back then were better in terms of heart, determination, and grit. If fighters nowadays are better conditioned, more powerful, faster... then they would also be more resistant to injury, and would fight 150 fights.

Back then, it wasn't about being "unbeaten" it was about fighting the best and being the last man standing... Regardless of whether he drew a crowd, had fans or next to none, it was TRULY what fighting was about.

Nowadays I fear that it is not the same mentality. Now it is not the last man standing, or fighting the best... but buying the best... and getting the last Bentley in the sales lot standing.

 

Considering boxing was more popular then and fighters fought more since they had to, in addition to having a larger pool to take from (past 20 years or 15 years has modern fighters, while all of boxing history for past fighters), your logic is flawed and this thread is useless now.