Do Older Boxers get more respect than they truly deserve in all time rankings?

Back in Joe Louis's day boxing way ahead of other sports in terms of fitness and performance. Boxers have not shown the improvements that we have seen in other sports is simply because they had already achieved the apex of athletic achievement. To say that modern boxers are in any way better than their predecessors is a gross exaggeration.

 

You're wrong.
It's the achievements in an era.... end of story.

 

All sports had their greats..in basketball would you choose Oscar Robertson over Isiah Thomas or Koby over both....it all related to the ages and the times they play...Robertson won every where he played...wining National Titles with UC and the Milwaukee Bucks etc...

Hell would you rahter have Johnny Unitas or Peyton Manning at the helm of the Colts.....Unitas won a number of Championships, Peyton only one....

 

I think that sometimes fighters don't get the credit they are do because they are legends.. Example is the recent thread where people were calling Roberto Duran one of the most over-rated fighters in history. Its not like we cannot watch his fights, or that some of us were not around to watch them when they took place..

Part of the problem is that people desperately want their current fighter to be the GOAT, or comparable to the greats and must degrade these fighters in order to make up for their favorite fighters shortcommings.

 

true

 

Anyone who calls Roberto Duran overrated needs to turn in their boxing fan card for a figure skate fan card, they don't deserve to call themselves a fan of the sport.

 

Oh...that's that then

So if you have two fighters from different eras, that have beaten roughly the same competition, how do you rank them?

Do you take a guess? Toss a coin? Do they rank right alongside each other? How do you decide which is slightly ahead?

Head to head is far more sensible

 

or syncronize swimming.....:rofl

 

You don't decide those things, what you're discussing is not possible, therefore, it's not sensible.
You need a time machine.

 

What are you on about now?

These fantasy match-ups are discussed all the time on here. It's not supposed to be conclusive, it's just a bit of fun

You can make educated guesses on fighters across eras. Achievements are the first criteria, but if nothing seperates them then head to head is the only way in my opinion

 

It is complicated but when they make ATG list, people take in consideration the competition , how tough was their opponents, and we might ahve more techinical advances but we also ahve more diluted talent pool than 50 years ago,add to that only the 10 weightclasses...the talent was abundant.....and that would be the point that make todays fighters to really be great to even out the ATG's accomplishments

 

The olden day fighters in my opinion DON'T get the respect they deserve:-( they fought in an era of longer fight's 15 rounds or more, compared to 12 now, and the old era fighters fought without the advantages of modern day supplements, such as Steriods, Andro, Creatine, personal trainers, and other advanced training techniques, and they were tougher too they didn't stop a fight unless a guy was half dead, with his eyeball hanging out of his head, now a guy get's on the ropes, and in trouble they stop it:verysad
Fighters of old make today's look like wimps..