Do you think hw boxers from the past (20s-50s) were more skilled than now?

I think it's more up to the individuals than across the board.
Guys like Louis Schmeling Charles ect were incredibly skilled and in superb condition. I also can say the same thing for some HW's in the 60's 70's and 80's then I think it thins out a bit. I don't see alot of skills today except for a few guys TBH

 

No, it all depends on individuals.

 

Isn't it strange, that this "thinning out" of skills happens to coinside with the huge influx of fighters from countries, where pro boxing wasn't allowed prior to the fall of The Wall? And at a time where boxing has become more international than ever?

 

Agreed

 

Oh God yes. Undeniably. Not every guy is better by default but the elites are better to me without question.

 

If you wanted to get paid you fought and drew a gate. If you wanted to get paid every week or month you could back then. If you want to get good at something you do it a lot. That is why they were better back then.

 

I think that they were, and the reason might be quite simple.

Most of them were men who would be fighting at cruiser or light heavy today, and the men in those divisions are on average more skilled than the heavyweights today.

 

More like people were considered heavy above lower weight that we do today, but big and strong people always existed, no matter the sport. I think we've too many overweight people in the sports, no matter boxing or even powerlifting and by saying so I don't even mean like fat.

Considering back in the days they used to fight more often, plus many of them had occupations, boxing wasn't their only, I think in some aspects were more conditioned, so they lacked some advantages people have now, but had others.

Heavy lifting is just fine, mandatory even, but it has to be done according the sport you practice.

 

I cannot think of any era where the best men from 175-200, were not on average superior from a technical standpoint, to the best men of 220+

You get the obvious exceptions, but it almost seems to be the law of nature.

 

Compare Usyk to the 220 pound men of history and you realize how skilled he is. Guys like Zhang and Bakole may look plodding and overly reliant on traps compared to some guys from decades ago, but they also weigh literally 80 pounds more than the people they're being compared to. It's akin to asking why Briedis can't move like Akhmadaliev

 

the skills of professional boxer from those countries is increased .. because there were 0 professional boxers from those countries before. as you say.

but does anyone look for example at American top boxers today & compared skills & ability to top boxers of 70s 80s and see it the ability increased?

we know the Americans were better then than now. for example. & in amateur Olympics boxing the top American teams did compete well against with well funded Soviet & East Bloc & Cuban communist Olympics boxer.

yes this is strange.

 

It's not that long ago that British heavyweights were ridiculed by American writers.
One said if you lied down all the British heavyweights up end to end no-one would be surprised.
The likes of Henry Cooper, knighted for bleeding copious amounts of blood and being counted out by Ali, Patterson, Johannson and Folley but being a jolly good loser.
I'll take the modern British Behemoths any day.
Maybe it's just American Heavyweights that've gone down hill.