One hears the claim from time to time that heavyweight boxing skills peaked in the 60s or 70s, and that modern heavies lack those skills. What say you? And why say you that?
In skill we have to compare the HWs of that time to the CWs today, since they are much closer size wise, but today's CWs actually being bigger on average. I think today's CWs hold up well in comparison. Briedis and Usyk especially.
Crazy to think of how many 70s era greats could fight at cruiser under today's rules. Any of the guys around 210-215 at their peak could have shed a couple pounds of fat (especially Holmes, who was never very lean even at 215), dehydrated down to 200. Same goes for earlier era guys draining down to LHW.
It should be obvious enough that shorter distances limits the opportunity to deploy skills. If you spend 3 rounds deploying a feint and the return isn't great, you've spent a quarter of the fight on that work - whereas, in the day, you had 12 rounds still to spend on other strategies. If you lose the first three rounds of a 12 round fight, it's extremely difficult to win that fight - you can only cede two of the remaining nine rounds to your opponent if you want to win. There just isn't the same amount of time to deploy deep skill. That means you don't practice that skill. That means the range of skills usable diminishes, which limits what is in a coach's toolbox and etc. That said, you can invest more in deploying great technique to throw many more punches per round. You can also invest more heavily in athleticism generally and muscles in particular to make you stronger and more explosive. So you can still argue that modern boxing is more enjoyable, even better, but yes, fighters are generally less skilled to the point where a deep-skill fighter is noticeable and remarked upon and described as being "old school."
Just look at what a prime Ali or Prime Holmes could do to the like of Wilder, Fury etc….. those guys do not have the skills. In my opinion Lewis was the last legit Heavyweight that had any skills.
Let’s see Uysk fight 3-5 times a year against quality opposition which isn’t there right now. AJ??? Yeah right
Maybe the majority of today’s heavies but there are still exceptions like Usyk and Fury. As for skills peaking in the 60s and 70s I dunno. Holmes was at his peak at the start of the 80s then you had fellow Atg’s in the 80s and 90s like Tyson Holyfield an Lewis. Moorer was as good a heavyweight southpaw as just about any heavyweight before him . Then you also had Wlad, Vitali and Bowe who like Fury today used their size as well as their skill to be as effective and successful as they were but still, they were not lacking in skills and boxing knowledge either.
He absolutely could fight that often. The only thing is none of these guys fight that much anymore. Back in the day they did because the purses sucked. I'm not saying Uysk is as good as Holmes and I am certainly not saying he is as good as Ali but the guy is very skilled. His amateur career was off the charts and he literally cleaned out the entire cruiserweight division before moving up. He can't be blamed for the class of his era. He has proven that he would fight anyone and even in their own backyard.
They just don't have the opposition to prove it. Pure eye tests are silly as they are not much different than a highlight reel committed to text, an we all know those can be deceving. Don't have the resume don't have the proof, simple as that.
I won't argue with that too much. Seems to be something missing in the Heavyweight s nowadays compared to the Lewis era.