Lost arts in boxing

Fair didn't know that

 

When Ray Robinson fought for the 175 pound title, he weighed 157 and a half pounds. He started at lighweight as a very young man, matured into a welterweight. He weighed 151 when he first became middleweight champion.
If you gave modern fighters same day weigh ins, they would come in heavier. Without an extra 24-36 hours, sometimes even more, to rehydrate, they wouldn't be able to cut as drastically. Which is why a guy like Crawford, who has long been known to get up to close to 200 between fights, would never have been a welterweight if he weighed in the day of the fight.
Judging fighters in the division they actually fought in has become a difficult thing to do. Leo Sant Cruz 'weighed in" at 126 but fought at 144? What division did he fight in? How can you call him a featherweight when, in the ring, he is a welterweight?

 

Crawford started at lightweight in the amateurs under same-day weigh-ins, so there’s already evidence he can make lower weights without modern rehydration. He just wouldn’t be cutting as aggressively.

Fighters today are bigger, sure but that’s largely because the rules allow them to be. If you remove that extra recovery time, they don’t just stay the same size and move up divisions, they adjust their weight like fighters always have.

And this isn’t new fighters have always cut weight for an advantage, even with same-day weigh-ins. It’s part of why the rules changed in the first place.

So I don’t think it’s accurate to take a modern fighter’s rehydrated weight and treat that as the division they “really” belong in. That’s just one version of them under today’s rules, not a fixed weight across all eras and rules.

 

Look, I didn't mention Usyk to begin with because I know you're never gonna change your mind on him and trying to change it is not a pursuit I find rational. To respond, I'm happy and wish more modern fighters are superior to greats of the past. Usyk is one of them. What I'm not convinced of, is that he's able to beat everyone or that he's superior to every past great. Mayweather, Pacquiao, B-Hop, Jones, etc are all modern greats who I'm perfectly happy ranking above the vast majority of old timers. Especially in ability.

Right, so correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that they can still cut to 147 or 118, they just wouldn't be as big when they get in the ring a few hours later as they've less time to rehydrate. For example, instead of Crawford being like 172 on fight night, he might be like 157 or something.

I disagree with this - and even if they were both able to do this for an entire career - I really doubt they'd be anywhere near as potent (durable, fast, hit as hard, strong, cardio, etc) as they are in today's world. When a fighter cuts weight today, they do so with the understanding that they've got nearly a day and a half to go from being a shriveled up, dried out raisin to a big, beautiful, juicy grape. The longer you have to rehydrate, the more water you can cut to begin with, as you have more time to safely regain the water.

Fighting while severely dehydrated isn't something any smart fighter does, which is why I find it much more likely that they would chose to rehydrate to the same weight today and cut less to begin with, than to cut the same amount that do today and rehydrate less.

Inoue was 19 when he was an amateur, and he grew so quickly unable to fight there that he moved up two weight divisions by 21 and then grew out his third by 24. At 118 he was weighing 130 on the night (Donaire rematch)

Crawford, even in the modern age, by the time he was fighting 12 rounders at lightweight, was already clearly suffering from cutting too much weight and started looking much better at 140 and especially 147. I don't think there's anything about his career which suggests he could be at 147 comfortably without time to rehydrate. He was also in his teens when he was an amateur making 135 the day he fought.

So I'm not arbitrarily increasing their weight, I'm assuming they will weigh in closer to what they actually weigh on the night - rather than them weighing in at the weight they fight at and coming in lighter on fight night. In either case - it is ultimately irrelevant - I struggle to see them becoming "champ in any era".

There's eras where Crawford wouldn't even be allowed to fight for the title, there's eras where Inoue would be a pilot of a fighter jet with half a tank of fuel. Even if we just put them straight into a title fight - they'd have to beat someone like Zarate, Olivares or Jofre in Inoue's case or Robinson, Gavilan or Leonard in Crawford's. And they'd have to do so with the effects of rehydrating less - so worse chins, less speed, strength, power and cardio.

I don't see it happening, whether they fight in the same weight class as today or they move up to their actual size. Especially in the latter case.

 

Out of curiosity who pre 80s would you consider better then him? Ali and Louis are the obvious answer but i would give Usyk good chances against both, though if you disagree that's fair. Outside of those two don’t see much.

To be clear what I’m saying is their walking weight would be lower in a same-day weigh-in era, because they wouldn’t have any reason to bulk up and cut as much as they do today.

I don't think that if they fought in different ruleset modern they would cut the same weight but just rehydrating less, which would obviously make them worse. I believe that in a same-day weigh-in era, they wouldn’t be draining themselves like that to begin with, rather they would come in lighter and more balanced, like fighters in that era did. For example someone like Crawford would walk around the same weight Robinson or Leonard did when they fought at WW, both of whom are very close in size to Crawford.

So it’s not “same fighter but weaker,” it’s a different version of the fighter adapted to those rules. They wouldn’t be stepping in the ring compromised, because no one could sustain that over a career.

Once you account for that, you’re not left with someone with a worse chin or cardio, just a slightly lighter version of the same skillset.
And at that point it comes down to ability, and Inoue and Crawford are skilled enough that it’s not unreasonable to say they would have good chances against any champion in the past.

 

Yeah, those are the main two. I'd also give Frazier, Foreman and Marciano good chances. I just don't see anyway there's nobody from before the 80s who beats him.

But we have absolutely no idea what they're walking around weight would be? You can't be mad at me for 'artificially moving fighters up multiple weight classes' when you're just artificially moving them down? They could decide not to fight at Welter or Bantam and be the same size as now, then fight at a higher weight. They could make more money up higher, they could go in the military and gain 20lbs, they might be ducked and have to move up.

If that's what you truly believe - that they'd be a different version of the fighter - then how on earth can you be so confident they'd be champion in any era? Also, that's not my argument that they'd be stepping into the ring compromised. My argument is that they could be exactly as they are right now, by fighting at higher weights than they do today.

I don't see why that's a certainty. I've got no doubt whatsoever that Leonard beats Crawford and I've got no doubt that Olivares beats Inoue. They'd be excellent and great fighters in any era they fought but there's no basis to say they'd be THE champion in any era. In the 40s Crawford probably wouldn't be allowed to fight for the belt and Inoue would probably be in a jet with half a tank of fuel.

 

I get giving Frazier and Foreman chances off their ATG status, even if I don’t fully agree style wise.

Marciano’s a different case though. He’s too small, too slow, and too limited technically to deal with someone like Usyk. His whole approach relied on physically overwhelming opponents, and that just doesn’t work here. Usyk’s movement, angles, and control at range would keep him from ever setting his feet consistently, and Marciano doesn’t have the tools to adjust to that. But I get if you dont went to get into that so not gonna press you on it.

I’m not saying we know exactly what they’d weigh, that’s kind of my point. There are multiple ways it could play out.

You’re saying they’d just stay the same size and move up, but that’s still an assumption. They could also come in lighter and stay around similar divisions, because they wouldn’t have the same incentive to bulk up and cut as much.

I’m just trying to keep it fair. If we don’t know what their exact walking weight would be, then we shouldn’t treat one outcome as certain while dismissing the other.

And I’m also trying to make the comparison fair. If we start putting fighters into weight classes they never actually fought in, then we lose any real basis for comparison. At that point, any cross-era debate just becomes guesswork because you’re no longer comparing what fighters actually were.

On the “champion in any era” point, I’m not saying it’s guaranteed in every scenario. I’m saying their skill level is high enough that it’s a defensible take. Disagreeing is fine, but it’s not some ridiculous claim either. They’d be competitive with any fighter in the past, just like any all-time great would be.

 

Thanks man, I enjoyed reading this post. As a fan, and not an active participant in boxing, it's sometimes difficult to pick up on the subtleties of the game, but you articulated the section about Archie Moore really well.