Lol... one of those hard-to-kill myths!
OK... can you give me some examples?
Right... so please tell me, where it is I have been argumentative, with the purpose of stirring up some debate?
I'm not sure, when I have played devils advocate here, for the sake of argument. Is it when I don't agree Tommy Burns would beat Deontay Wilder?...
But that's just the problem... who decides if someone knows, what he's looking at? If you agree, that boxing has devolved over the last several...
In 2003 their "Top 100 Punchers Of All Time" had Ketchel in 6th place: Ring Magazine Top 100 Punchers Of All Time (liveabout.com)
I sincerely hope, that ref was never again allowed to be the 3rd man in the ring!
Bernard Hopkins can be found in The Ring's end of year rankings 24 years in a row (1992 to 2015). Don't think anyone comes close to beating that!
Yeah, Loma is one of these modern, coddled/protected boxers, who was moved very quickly - and was a 3-division title holder after less than 20...
Of course, they probably learn something in every new fight - but that many matches against the same opponent, surely can't be as "educational" as...
Yeah, back in the "good old days" (20s, 30s or whatever) the top boxers fought each other all the time - and many times, too! But how much extra...
So Mike Silver is one of many instrumental in establishing this "documentation and Consensus". You mean the guy who has made a career of bashing...
Right, so there isn't really some general consensus, about the 1940s being a superior decade! And why would there be?... the first half of the...
Does this mean, that some sort of objective consensus among boxing experts/aficionados has named the 1940s a superior decade? I have never heard...
This reminds us, once again, that old-timers proclaiming that boxing was so much better "back in the day", should be taken with a pinch of salt.
