Come on now, to think that the best of the 1910s in any sport can even compete well against the best of more recent decades is just plain silly....
We can't recognise differences in technology, medicine, economics, demographics, attitudes, equipment, rules, techniques?
Possibly but Thomas was a top heavyweight at the time. Willard may have been a top heavyweight in his but almost by default such was the dearth of...
I'd say the gap was substantially larger than that. Hard to know for sure but I suspect that other poor heavyweights might have defeated Johnson...
How do you know who is the best? You are right that results matter too though.
I guess it depends on what way you look at it. Willard was pretty poor compared to what Johnson had been but he was in right place at right time...
Who would win between perhaps the best (super) heavyweight of his (modern) era versus a top 5 heavyweight (cruiserweight) from a very poor late...
I never thought i'd ever pick Warrington over Frampton but I think Warrington might just outwork Frampton.
The correct answer is almost always the modern fighter. In this case Willard was not even particularly good for his time period.
Fielding is about European level so I wouldn't have thought so.
I don't think that increased population and therefore increased potential talent pool necessarily produces better boxers because of course there...
In terms of creating a strong boxing culture most of these countries you listed were in an inchoate state in the 1940s and 50s. The 1950s is the...
It worked for Fullmer to judge distance but as a punch it looked more like a roman/fascist/nazi salute than an actual punch.
Gene Fullmer's jab actually makes me laugh.
In regards to talent pool the following things need to be taken into account: The boader talent pool is simply the world population, and that has...
