Are heavyweights under rated today?

Wow, we found common ground! Throw Dokes and Page in there and the 80's had some good talent. To bad it was ruined by cocaine!

 

One hole in that argument is the success Foreman and Holmes were able to have well into their 40's during this HW golden age. The 80's are considered weak yet Holmes beat a prime Mercer who essentially fought to a draw against the premier HW of the era in Lennox.

 

Terrible era. One of the worst, if not the worst, of all time. It is literally shooting boxing in the foot. Atleast you have the Mayweathers', Pacquiaos', and Cottos' of the world keeping boxing alive.

 

Lets look at a bit of a heavyweight timeline shall we. In 1974 a 25 year-old Foreman lost to past prime Ali, fast forward 23 years later and a fat, almost 50 year-old Foreman should have got the decision against prime Shannon Briggs but was robbed. Fast forward again to 13 years later and Briggs, at the age of 40 and shot, is still seen as good enough to challenge for a World title. So no, this era is not underrated, it is garbage.

 

most of them lumber and look fat. theres way too much awful.

 

how? he cant lean back and tower over 25 year old wlad, and he wont last as long in the ring so jab and run away is no use.25 year old wlad would probably spark out old wlad early half the time, and the other half he'd lose on pts.

Besides the guy is referring to old boxers thriving today, which is very different to what you are describing. 50 year old Goerge Foreman is not better than prime young foreman.

which wlad are you watching???
this one jabs and runs and wrestles, that is his only skillset! What other skillset are you imagining?

I am referring to wlad in reality rather one you saw in your homo dreams.

Whats the point in saying Floyd is boring too to justify wlad being boring? Do you mean that as a point in reference to skillset - because Floyd has a sublime skillset, not jab and run and wrestle.

so why doesn't every HW champ get sparked out when they are hit on the chin, and not just Wlad?

sanders, Brewster et al disagree. as does wlad.

 

Really? Tell me about their body punching and defensive skills. Tell me about their stamina and speed. The only thing that has evolved is PED's.

 

truth! :good

Tony Tucker, Buster Douglas, Mike Hercules Weaver, 80's Big George, and even a blown up Michael Spinks i would take over Adamek, Arreolla, Tony Thompson, Chisora and Denis Boystov

 

i like this post :good

 

evolution is something you are misquoting.

Evolving does not mean 'to get better than predecessors at everything', it is getting better suited to the current environment than your predecessors could have managed.

That what evolution is , best adaptation to the current status quo. teenage trainee longbow soldiers from the middle ages could rip the heads of big men of today in terms of pure strength and fitness.

 

And just last year 40-year-old Hasim Rahman got a World title shot, the division is terrible.

 

If you hate the Klitschko Brothers, the division is garbage.

If you like the Klitschko Brothers, the division is outstanding.

Looking at it objectively as possible, the HW division has been bleeding talent since the late 50s. Since that time the division has been pretty consistent with only two or three active stand outs operating at a time with an assortment of interchangable near-men. Some near-men have had more success than others over favorable circumstances and that has created an impression of depth where there truely is none, the 90s has many of those.

 

I think people confuse blown up records (Deontay Wilder amongst other :good) for actual skills. Most of the 80's guys had a great 2 fisted attack with good body work and defense such as slipping punches to counter and parrying. I once did a comparison of 15-0 Witherspoon to todays contenders over at the scene and there were no arguments except for size. To me size means little in comparison to skills.