The problem is that when you seen films of many top 1930's heavyweights, they just don't look good. Lasky, Hamas, Neusel, Levinsky, etc are on film looking very unimposing. One doesn't see the boxing skill one sees in the fifties from mere contenders like Henry, Baker, Machen, Folley, etc. Why not? Obviously the color line walled off a lot of talent. The history of the heavyweight division after the fall of the color line vividly etches what the impact had been. The Depression might not have had quite the immediate impact folks assume. There were always plenty of poor people. Whether going from bad poverty to dire poverty made much of a difference concerning the allure of money from boxing is debatable. Also, I would assume the purses generally fell as the fans wouldn't have had as much money for tickets. As for those who had decent jobs before being thrown out of work by the Depression, I would guess most of them wouldn't have turned to boxing. The influx of talent would have come later when the lack of good jobs for young men moving into the work force made prize fighting a more attractive alternative. This would probably have come on more strongly in the late thirties or early forties. 1940 is interesting in that Sugar Ray Robinson, Ezzard Charles, Ike Williams, Willie Pep, and Jimmy Bivins all began their pro careers that year.
I like eras when top fighters fought each other often. That's why I'm a fan of 1890s, 1930s, 1940s and 1970s.
This. The top guys also fought eachother a lot more often, which explains the greater number of losses. Too many fighters nowadays sit on rankings or a title for years without ever fighting good competition.
