Did old school fighters have more testosterone in their system?

i think nutrition, advanced medicine and a lighter workload have all contributed to a longer life expectancy. you take 10 random men from 1940 and 10 from 2017 and i bet the difference in ring miles on the bodies is huge, and you would be lucky to find one in 1940 who had seen a doctor in the last 20 years.

 

This idealism of the past and how "men were men" has little relevance when comparing old school and modern elite boxers. While many men today live the lifestyle people here describe, men who really want to be elite athletes or fighters have more possibilities today than they would have had in the past.

Is the average man today less "manly" that the average men from 100 years ago? Relatively, yes. Does this apply to elite boxers? No!

People need to understand that elite athletes are a special breed of people who can be born in any environment and in any age. Think about Ayrton Senna who was born in a life of privilege and wouldn't have to work a single day in his life, yet he became the most courageous and determined athlete of all times and paid with his life at the age of 33.

Then take someone like Floyd or Pacman who have trained their entire life. They have had more difficult lifestyle than even people who worked in factories in the industrial age, the amount of hard work that Floyd and Manny had to do in their life is astonishing.

The society is simply more diverse today meaning that you can find a bigger number of "feminine" men, fat men, men who are into some nerdy hobbies and men who have been spoiled their entire life by the Western comfort lifestyle, but on the other hand you have a huge spectrum of people who are obsessed with going to the gym or train combat sports or some other sport.

The thing is that today if you want to be courageous and build a strong character you need to seek challenges yourself while in the past more men faced difficult challenges because they simply had to.

 

People love to romanticize the past. Well, the present has lower infant mortality rates, vaccines, higher life expectancy, TV and internet. I don't know about you, but I'll take the present.

 

i agree with this. there were no trophies for participation back then.

 

That wasn't his point.

 

so would everyone else, doesnt change the fact that men today are different animals from those that made up the greatest generation.

 

Those masculine men of the past you idealize are probably some old school working class guys. While they were probably tough that doesn't mean that they had the character to become an elite boxer. Those are the kind of guys who work hard during the day then afterwards they would sit and drink beer with their buddies and have no ambition in life. Then they come home and their wives give them hard time and they either don't want to argue with them out of some manly pride and let them have their way or just beat them up and feel like **** about themselves and drink some more. This is the story of 90% of these types of men.

If you want to be elite in boxing it's good to have some "feminine" character traits as well like being a diva and acting entitled. It's not necessary but it's good. That's why boxers like Andre Ward, Floyd, David Haye, Cotto etc. thrive. People have hard time accepting this but this is the truth.

Obviously there are also real men from working class environment like Kovalev who do well, but he's just a special type of character with his determination and will power, most people aren't like that. It doesn't mean that if you have a life like Kovalev had that you'll become a great boxer out of some sheer toughness.

Then you have guys like Duran who embodied machismo and was a great boxer because of that but let's face it also made a lot of shitty decisions in his career and had bad discipline which is what most of "macho" types are like.

 

It's only considered the greatest generation by old white men nostalgic for a time when blacks had separate drinking fountains, and women were expected to stay home.

 

and only female raised candy asses with an inferiority complex would believe that nonsense.

 

processed and high sugar foods have given us super athletes.

 

The answer is simple yet no one gave it....................
They were FIGHTERS !!! back then. Today boxing is filled with Prima Donna
business men. They only wabt to fight cherry picked opponents. None is a better example of this that Mayweather. He is regarded as tn ATG becayse he has a bogus 0 & hs ammassed a fortune. The fact he achieved it by VERY dubious means & corruption doesn't matter. Plus the fact he cannot FIGHT!! a lick

 

Im talking about recess.

In my school they banned tackling.

In my friends school, they did too, then they said you cant 2 hand tap, only pass the ball around. Then they banned the football itself lol. Ive net many guys who told me similar stories.

Toy guns/airsoft guns are confiscated, "sword fights" with sticks are banned, etc.

Lmao at nothing wrong with being raised by 1 parent. Sometimes its succesful, sometimes that leads to boys becoming sissies/simps/or thugs and the girls raised by single parents can easily become stuck up miss-independent feminists, entitled gold diggers, or whores.

 

What do you define as a sissy/wimp? Like, a boy who's not into sports?

 

This.

 

Back in the days when European families had tons of children they were mostly hardly raised at all. The figure of a father who raises his son is very recent, at least in the way that is understood today.