Everyone seems to say (and rightfully so) "You can't compare fighters of yesteryear to fighters of today because fighters back then fought more often, fought all comers, had fewer weight classes," etc. So, when (in your opinion) did boxing start to become the product that it is today? We will not likely see a single modern boxing great (or at least not many) eclipse a 65+ fight career, which wouldn't have been nearly as uncommon 50 or 60 years ago. If you look at a lot of today's champions and recently-retired champions/hall of famers, they usually reach about the 50 or 60 fight mark before retiring. Most of them also fight a MAX of 4 times a year, with it more likely being 2 or 3 times a year. Do you think this is more of a product of criticism and evidence of brain damage to boxers and other high-impact athletes being given more media attention today? Or is it the result of promoters trying to "protect their products" by putting them in the ring with only opponents that don't pose a large threat (and on a less frequent basis) and doing a much better job advertising/hyping fights? I just think it's a two-way street when posters say "Today's fighters couldn't hang with the great fighters of the past - they only fight two or three times a year!" I don't believe this has anything to do with modern fighters' "courage" or "heart," but rather an increased knowledge and awareness within society regarding how taxing a sport like boxing is on the brain and the rest of the body. Fighters today don't fight less often because they are cowards or because they don't have what it takes to span a long career - they fight less often because boxing IS a business now and we live in a different society, one that places a far greater emphasis on sports safety. We've seen the lasting health consequences of boxers that stayed in the game too long and/or fought too often, and we would be wise to LEARN from them rather than expecting the same of today's fighters. I DON'T WANT TO SEE Floyd, Manny, Shane, Wlad and others walking around with Parkinson's or early Alzheimers when they're older just to prove they were as "tough as the old timers." Boxers make FAR bigger purses per fight today, thus they don't HAVE to fight as often to make the money that boxers in the past made (and many of them DID fight solely for money, in same cases money they owed the government in taxes). When do you think this shift started to happen? Do you think events like the Griffith/Paret fight and the Kim/Mancini fight had a lot to do with it, or is it more a result of the change in promotional practices? I'm curious about what everyone else thinks on this.
I would say Ali in particular brought Dementia pugilistica to the forefront of boxing. His fate was sealed though, he took too much punishment too often and his defense was never too spectacular. He should have stopped fighting after Foreman. People notice DP/Alzheimers more now though, because of progressions in medicine and in lifespan, actually. Since people's lifespans are extended so much these days DP symptoms are more likely to manifest during those senior years. But it's not like CTE/DP is found in just boxers- there are cases of it being found in football, hockey, and soccer players more and more now. Contact sports are dangerous.
Ali definitely crossed my mind...having THE single most recognizeable boxing figure (and one that even transcended boxing) in recent decades struggle with Parkinsons has to make promoters and fighters alike rethink their career aspirations in terms of longevity.
