Are modern boxers really fitter than in previous eras?

Fighters were generally fitter. Longer distances caused an emphasis upon cardiovascular conditioning thus the very ripped low body fat appearances. Old timers emphasized road work which included calisthenics, leapfrogging, rock throwing, running up hill, running backwards etc. Today’s fighters only need to worry about fighting 12 rounds max which is a far lower bar. No need to spend extensive time on the road.

 

Yes I know, Ruiz is fat and Joshua gasses after 6 rounds… but, generally speaking, is there any reason to believe, that todays boxers don't do their best to get in shape? Since 12 rounds is only 80% of the old 15 rounds distance - do you think modern boxers decide, that there's no reason to put in more than an 80% effort when training for a big fight?

 

Or maybe if you have only 12 rounds instead of 15, you train harder because you have less time to get the job done and have to make sure you put more effort into every round whereas 15 rounds you may be able to coast a few rounds and still make up the difference in the scoring?

 

Those three extra rounds are a huge deal. It was called the championship distance for a reason.

Just look at most of the hwts the past 20 years. They do not train to fight the championship distance and it shows. They can barely get through 12. Again there was always an emphasis on “road work” which entailed multiple cardio related exercises including running.

 

Ok, I'll ask again! Forgetting for a moment the heavyweights… do you honestly believe, that boxers in general today put in less than a maximum effort to get in the best possible shape, when preparing for a big fight?

 

I think the problem with a lot of them currently isn't effort when in camp, but lack of consistency especially out of camp. Pushing yourself a bit harder isn't going to make up for blowing up in weight between camps.

There's always been a pretty broad spectrum of people who live like Boxing Monks, and guys who barely train.

 

The key word here is "always"! As you say, there are more or less dedicated boxers - today, just like in the old days.

 

I'd agree. You only have to look at someone like Young Griffo

 

Yeah, hated to train, and was drunk most of the time!

 

I personally think there’s most likely very little difference either way. The really big unresolved question is in my mind is one of talent pools.

 

You people do realize that most boxers back in the good old days fought so often that there were no such thing as training camps, that injuries lingered for years because there was no time to heal, the idea of peaking for a contest was at best an afterthought, that travel to a venue took days aboard railroads where training was almost impossible... The pursuit of cash and pace of a career was detrimental to peak fitness.

 

The heavyweights from Johnson's era fought at a much slower pace. This allowed them to make through those 26 rounds.

 

I think the pace of this looks pretty solid.

This content is protected

 

Yes, that's another interesting question - and one that is very difficult to say anything definite about.

BoxRec can tell us the number of active boxers they have in their database for each year - but how accurate are they? How many fights are they missing from "back in the day"? There's no way of knowing - but probably a lot!

100 years ago, for 1919, BoxRec lists (as of May this year) slightly less than 11,000 active boxers - as compared to around 23,000 last year. So are there twice as many active boxers today, compared to 100 years ago? Very unlikely, would be my guess! In fact, if every fight back then was recorded, the two groups may be very comparable in size… but, again, who knows?

What really has changed over the last century, is the composition of the talent pool. In 1919 only 34 countries hosted professional boxing - as against 118 last year. The global talent pool is much, much more international today, compared to back in the "good old days". Of this, there can be little doubt!

 

What do you think about the World Wars effext on the talent pools? They most surely lowered British talent levels.