Are boxers better/more skilled today?

What about Canelo’s conditioning vs Hagler’s, who could go 15 rounds? What great past MW’s do you think he’s beating with modern training methods?

What dominant past welterweights is Thurman beating?

What great lightweights is Linares beating?

I ask for specifics because the belief has to be substantiated by something other than a gut feeling if you’re going to stick to your guns. Again the heavyweights are a different discussion.

 

Broner and Floyd is a good representation of this whole principle. Broner was able to smoke Floyd on the basketball court and run up multiple flights of stairs in just 2 minutes. Incredible explosive athlete. But he can’t use the same style nearly as effectively, even against naturally smaller fighters.

This content is protected

This content is protected

Sprinting speed and running endurance and weight-lifting strength and all these basic measures for athleticism don’t translate into knowing how to box.

 

With all the "Modern and high tech training" techniques of today, the skill level of the top guys is closer to mere contenders of yesterday/yesteryear.

Keith Thurman wouldn't even have a belt if he fought in the 80's or 90's. Wilder would be just another failed big guy with extremely poor technique.

 

What about Canelo and Hagler? If an individual from a past era is superior in some way or even overall does that prove the decline of boxing? I'm not claiming every current contender is superior to every legend of the past nor anything close to that.

I am pretty much a casual who mainly follows the heavier divisions and am not familiar enough with lightweights or welters through history to give you answers for who Linares and Thurman would be favoured over.

Everything I've said is gut feeling, a counter-theory to the doom and gloom classicists who hate muscles and PEDs and love shoulder roll defences and gumption. I could be totally wrong and I may yet change my opinion but I am yet to hear a convincing argument for why these skills disappeared? It strikes me as more realistic that certain skills or styles fell out of favour for whatever reasons.

 

There have been several major changes to boxing that accounts for the older guys being better.
1) originally there were only 8 weight classes, now there’s 13. This allows lesser fighters to find their niche.
2) fighters used to have to weigh in on the day of the fight, not 24-36 hours prior. This is closely associated with #1 - it allows fighters to manipulate their weight with much more precision. The old guys had a choice of fighting at 147 or 160, not 154, so there was no rehydrating 15-20lbs.
3) there are now at least 4 recognized sanctioning bodies issuing “championship” belts, thereby diluting the term champion. It’s also closely associated with #1 & #2. This allows someone like Canelo to win the lineal and WBC middleweight championship, immediately forfeit the wbc belt in fear of fighting GGG and drop weight to fight some unheard kid for 154lb WBO belt. He is now regarding as a multiple weight champion with multiple “championship” belts with some people saying he’s hall of fame worthy but in fact he’s never even been an undisputed champ or even considered the best in his weight class. Canelo is not the only fighter to do this, he just happens to be the most recognized right now.
4) championship fights used to be scheduled for 15 rounds- now they’re only 12. Rounds 13-15 were called the “championship rounds” because that is where the truly great ones proved their endurance. Leonard vs Hearns, Marciano vs Walcott, Ali vs Frazier 3, Louis vs Conn, Arguello vs Pryor were all won after the 12th round in wars where the winners were actually losing on the cards until the stoppages.
5) fighters make better money now thereby not having to fight as often. With cable deals, product sponsorships and social media fighters have a vested interest in fighting less for more (which makes sense -I don’t blame them) and maintaining polished records (see #3) than actually fighting for glory and money.
6) The amateur system is pretty different to the pro system so a hot amateur may not automatically make it in the pros. Back in the day the two styles and scoring were very similar.
It’s about impossible to quantify just how significant same day weigh ins and 15 rounds are when compared to today’s fighters. Imagine sprinters competing in a 80 meter sprint, not 100 and you’ll see how big the difference is.

 

Today's fighters have better conditioning, yet seem to tire in the championship rounds (10-12)
Yesterday's fighters didn't have nutritionists, conditioning coaches, but fought 15 rounds as stated in above post.
Pre 1940's more rounds than that.

A fighter like Larry Holmes never had muscles let alone a physique, but he threw hellatious shot after shot rounds 12-15 against Norton.
Seems there is an inner piece to the discussion that can't be measured.

Aarron Pryor is a gr8 example. He was called "perpetual" motion. Meaning he threw weather he was balanced or off balance. He just wanted to beat folks UP! I'd say he would kick butt no matter what era. He was crazy like that. He had skills, but he usually won by nonstop incessant punching, that doesn't require skill, rather heart.

Same with Suicidal Hank Armstrong.. his nonstop incessant punching could nullify a person's skill set. How else did he win titles in 3 divisions .At the same time?
Yet today's athletes under HW, demand catchweights.
That makes today's fighters look punkish IMO. Especially after knowing what Hank did..3 divisions. Same time.
Yes, there more technical today and more in shape. Doesn't mean they could beat the fighters of old though.

 

I personally don’t think boxers/athletes of today are more talented per se, but the advances in training/diet/supplements/therapy/recovery/etc have advanced tenfold to make them more skilled.


Had the boxers/athletes of yesteryear had access/knowledge to all that current athletes have, I think they would be just as good.

 

Mmmm....I think it’s “Homicide” Hank, not “Suicidal”

 

One more on the old school. They were more brutish if anything.
Ray Robinson didn't have to fight counter puncher after counter puncher. He fought the Jake Lamottas and Gene Fullmers far more than he did the Gavilans of his day. Meaning cherry-picking isn't new school it long existed.

And he straight up avoided, ducked whatever U call it. He ducked the hell out of Charlie Burley (I'm too pretty to fight him).
In that sense I'd say Floyd & today's era has more experience fighting counter punchers than the guys of yesterday did. Because there are more guys today who try that style.

Shoulder roll and tucking the chin was mentioned far more back then because guys didn't run. They stood and traded. Today it is a better chance of watching a stinker between to technical boxers because they're trained to counter.
Yesteryear, it wasn't that way.
Like Angelo Dundee who told the skilled Ray Leonard against Hearns, "Ya blowing it kid. this is where we separate the boys from the men...ya blowin it kid"

So the skilled boxer won by taking the fight to the boxer-puncher-NOT getting more technical....and he won.

 

hmm, means I didn't boxrec! Correction noted!!!!!! I'm old...give me a pass on this!

 

1 & 2) I don't understand how this contributes to making fighters worse. Being more naturally suited to a weight class is advantageous to performance I would have guessed. The ability to put on significant weight post weighing in also sounds advantageous, at least to those who can most exploit it.

3) The term Champion has certainly been devalued since the inception of the alphabets. I accept greatness is harder to achieve in the modern era as a consequence of this (and less fights) but don't think this = worse fighters.

4) How do you feel about the guys who fought 50 rounds or more? We can safely assume fight fans said similar things about the change from unlimited rounds to a paltry 15. But I get your point and stamina does seem to be the Achilles heel of many a modern fighter.

5) While fighting often would no doubt be the tops when it comes to honing your craft this is one of the points about oldies vs currents where I think all the extra preparation for an opponent would translate into a higher level of performance. Also plenty more time to heal/recover and not aggregate injuries. (ps. I think the money at the top has pretty much been there for the last 100+ yrs)

6) I don't follow amateur boxing at all and I had never heard this before but that makes sense. The majority of fighters obviously come through the amateur ranks so if the transition is tougher today that could indeed help explain any decline in skills many fans bemoan. When and why did the amateurs change, do you happen to know?

 

I’ve gotta go get my poor dog from the vet - he got his balls cut off
I’ll try to answer your questions later.

 

Bro... dude... deez nuts?

 

Yup, dem’s da ones

 

I just can't see 1 in 40 adult men being professional boxers, dude. That's like Sparta.