Do past fighters get overrated because of nostalgia.

This content is protected

 

I'm not saying they couldn't I'm saying they don't. there's a big difference.
The difference when we look at heavies is pretty clear. Yes there bigger and carrying more muscle the problem is when you carry more muscle you gas very quickly. so for every percieved advantage there's an equal disadvatage.
The only way to test your theory would be to change it back to 15 rounds. Then that would force boxers to train in a very different way becasie now you're not training for the sprint you'd have to train for a marathon.
So as I stated in my first post it isn't a simple either or dynamic. I'm not saying old timers are better but I'm not saying todays are better either for the reasons I've already explained.
Again my point to you was that you picked individuals who are known for having a good gas tank and would therefore be able to pace themselves for another three rounds. They are the exception though and not the rule.

 

Based on what?
You have no evidence to back your assertion other than just saying words.
When in reality we see plenty of fighters struggle to do the 12.
My case in point would be heavyweight. which has seen a decline of endurance with boxers adding muscle mass.
That's something if you've watched the sport long enough is undeniable.

 

Your case starts and ends at heavyweight. And even then Usyk could do 15 rounds without a training camp.

 

You wrote this in response to my last post - where I didn't specifically pick individuals with a good gas tank. Instead I talked about boxers in general, so I'll ask you again: what makes you think modern boxers, generally speaking, won't be able to adjust to 15 rounds title fights, if they had to?

 

Are you dense or something?

You need to read the above post AGAIN I've already explained my position. your merely highlighting the last thing I said.

So I'll make it more concise..not without training differently and for the heavier weights losing a little muscle mass so they don't gas.

Is that better for you?

 

No can`t think of any modern day fighter other than Manny who can be called an all time great.Still there are some great fights out there none more so than last nights classic

 

nostalgia plays a role sure but also it helps that a retired fighter is a known commodity who has been watched in their entirety and is often studied to death

an active fighter still has unknowns and question marks that make it tough to pick a guy moving up the ladder vs a true legend

now there are arguments about eras being tougher or improvements over time etc

I will say there are aspects of old boxing that make it a much different animal than boxing today mostly due to the conditions that fights were fought at but thats another story

in my view there are great fighters and shitty fighters in all eras but a great then and a great now are great regardless and cross era fights wouldnt just skew old over new or new over old

 

Depends on how many boxers throughout history, we think should be called ATGs. It's not like HOFers; we know who they are (deservedly or not). There are a little over 300 of them... but how many of those deserve to be called ATGs? 20%?, 30%?, 50%?


PS: You're right about last night's fight... FOTY candidate for sure! There's a lot of things wrong with today's boxing, but every now and then we get something so truly amazing, that we're reminded, why we will always be hooked on this sport!

 

Probably. And the young guys on board here will probably do it as well when they get older.

 

Bukkake, I am a regular on the Classic. Who said Burns beats Wilder, Corbet beats Tua and Conn kos Usyk. I am very curious to know who wrote those things. Cheers

 

My god do that they ever it's unbelievable especially mention a current fighter beating a old fighter is seen as blasphemy on here

 

I think a lot of the older era fighters had it a lot harder then todays fighters, and there mental toughness was a lot stronger. Think about it like this, the old fighters from the 50’s were an example for the fighters of the 60’s and 70’s, the 70’s were an example for the 70’s and 90’s, the 90’s were an example for the 2000’s but after that fighters seem to be lacking in the willingness to challenge themselves and go out of there way now to say there old school because there taking a tough fight maybe once every 5 years in there careers. They’ve been programmed to go for cash instead of go for the gold and the glory. I don’t know maybe I’m wrong but it’s how I felt when I read the title.

 

To the OP. Absolutely YES, and I've been posting this for near 15 years here.

The nostalgia is especially bad in the HW div. where it gets ridiculous b/c it's unlimited weight. Many great HWs of the past would be CWs today. You can compare current and recent fighters at LtHW and lighter to fighters of the past.

You can also talk about modern training and diet, but how fighters of the past were mentally tougher all you want. In a high majority of cases a top 235# plus 2000s era HW beats a top 195# HW from the past.

 

It will be more noticeable, especially when it comes to big names shrouded in legend, since nostalgia can make some man outright unreasonable. On average though, I'd say you will see old timers underrated, especially if they had the old school style with not a lot of outside slips and explosive, flashy movements that are taken as skill by the so called boxing couch experts.

Among average fans old-schoolers are definitely underrated.