1931 v 1981 heavyweights - who wins?

Ray's record is incomplete on boxrec. We don't know a lot about him.

Earnie fought almost 70 fights in about 5 years, many contenders among them. You have to apply the real differences between eras.

Lost to some good contenders, same as Berbick.

Heavier, not bigger overall.

 

The quality of athlete and skill level of the 1980s absolutely shames the 1930s. If you are content to crow on about 180 pound fighters being great forces in the division, that is wonderful and charming. The same
fighters would not be sharing the ring with 1980s heavies. If you want to bolster an era which saw black fighters largely excluded, go ahead at risk to your own credibility.

Head to head, I can't see a fighter outside of Louis who would hold his own against the fighters of the 80's. Baer would be a poor man's ****ey at best.

 

I could see Baer knocking ****ey out, to be honest.

 

Baer would kill C00ney.
Both guys could hit, but only one could take a punch.

 

What's wrong with being a lumberjack ?:huh
I've notice you find the working classes of the 1930s a disagreeable bunch.
You also see midgets everywhere !

How would you characterize Holmes's challengers ?
Let me try ..
Berbick was a nutcase.
Leon Spinks was a toothless drug addict. Possibly lived in a box outside a liquor store.
Mike Weaver, journeyman or clubfighter.
C00ney, a knock-kneed alcoholic. One-armed oaf.
LeDoux, journeyman.
Leroy Jones, obese oaf.
Witherspoon, a 15-fight novice.
Marvis "But my father was a champion" Frazier.
Light-heavyweight Michael Spinks.
Lucien Rodriguez, Alfredo Evangelista and Lorenzo Zanon. Wtf were they? Waiters ?

 

I always thought Mike Weaver was the only one of that early/mid 80's bunch (besides Holmes) that maximized himself. I mean, he was a journeyman with limited skills. But he always was in shape and didn't get arrested or drug out during his peak. I think he can look back and know he did what he was able to.

 

Except for inactivity, which wasn't entirely his fault from memory.

You have to applaud Weaver, he went from being a journeyman, to a contender, to a belt holder.

His losing effort against a pretty peak Larry Holmes was simply superb, especially considering the odds and expectation. This is key fight to view when sizing Weaver up as a fighter.

He had an excellent win over Coetzee too.

Depending on your view he was ripped at least once by King against Dokes. The rematch is another good fight to watch of Weaver. From memory Dokes said he would never get in the ring with him again after the draw, stuff the title.

A couple of his best years were wasted, partially due to Don King.

 

I agree that Baer was a determined guy but ****ey hit a helluva lot harder than Lou Nova. I would venture to say he hit a lot more in the league of Joe Louis in terms of power. He also was faster and boxed better. Were not talking the geezer that fought at Caesars.

 

Wasn't Lou Nova his last fight?

 

Was it normal for someone with that kind of record to be in the top 10? If so, it could be a testament to the talent pool of those days.

 

I have never said that I was unimpressed by the talent of the 80s contenders.

Indeed I think that some of them were on the cusp of being something truly special.

The bottom line however, is that it was an era of disappointments, and missed opportunities.

The better 1930s contenders were much more successful as fighters, and that should be giving you pause for thought here.

 

81 in a landslide.