Do past fighters get overrated because of nostalgia.

Eh, no.

I think you're confusing discussions of better resumes with h2h scenarios.

 

I agree with most of what you say here!

My input in this thread, has been provoked by the silly notion on the first page (post #4), that fighters today wouldn't be able to go 15 rounds, if they had to. You hear this nonsense all the time, but that's exactly what it is - nonsense. Which should be obvious to anyone, whose agenda isn't to just ridicule modern boxers/boxing!

 

Yes.

If they had to.

I think what was meant by the comment, was that some of them would struggle to do it as we see them today.

As in - Some of today’s fighters are no where near as conditioned as what they should be.

 

That's true - not everybody today looks in tip-top shape. But hasn't it always been like that... with some boxers trained to the max, while others could (and should!) be more serious with their training? I don't think, this is a "modern" problem!

 

I think that it’s been like this for a while now. But again, the guys who fought a lot more often in decades gone by, simply had to be in better shape due to their circumstances.

 

How do we know that?

Surely the VAST majority of boxers back in, for example, the 20s, were journeymen - whose main ambition was to provide for their families. Is it not reasonable to think, that most of them wanted to get through their fights as painlessly as possible, with the least amount of effort... so they could live to fight another day; with their next outing being maybe only a week (or less) away? You don't have to be super-conditioned for fights like that!

 

Look from another perspective:

Because they were fighting for their livelihoods and so frequently, they couldn’t afford to not stay in shape.


Again, many of them must have fought whilst not being anywhere near 100%, with injuries etc.

Again, I’m talking more about them being more conditioned as in - on top of their weight.


They were on top of their weight all year round, and fit for most of the time.

They weren’t walking around at 20 pounds plus overweight during their inactive periods.

 

people say they would't go 15 rounds but if the rules stay at 15 then they will go train for 15? no...what a flaw logic.

 

No DJ Ango?

 

Listening to recency bias is just as worse. It simply goes both ways.

 

I think for comparing past boxers you have to include the levels of oppositions,techniques,training camp,speed(very important! bcuz if u fight slow...well u can go 15rds easy) Floyd going 15? want to see that or Canelo too! they will dimish they speed and intensity for sure. but it may change the outcome sometimes and that's interesting...why not! super events with 15 rounds will be interesting for sure i will pay alot for this.

 

Show me on the doll where nostalgia hurt you

If you are being honest, you'd see the opposite it true as well, instantly ruling out older boxers because Usain Bolt can run faster than Carl Lewis.

This whole thing is mostly stupid anyway....with all the palookas here who love to try and sound smart by saying, "Styles make fights", THAT is exactly how this is to be discussed. There's no one answer. But knuckleheads want to make it one group v another, all or nothing.

That being said, you who think todays are better are NOT putting up better arguments. If this were a debate competition, nostalgia would likely be ahead by a few points just due to better arguments presented.

 

they're a saying about past fighters:he's not in the ring anymore! can't compare apple to orange eh? new training and nutritions and new drugs of course! it's a new game now...look at Clubenterol i mean Canelo!