Does anybody employ the "advances in sports" argument consistently?

This is pretty much it. And its an indisputable fact.

A rich athlete with the money to be highly technical about his development and fitness can do amazing things with todays nutrition and athletic technology.

As a guy who knows Bernard Hopkins personally, its a BIG reason for his late age success. The guy essentially moved from 160 to 175 and became a better fighter in his 40's because of science.

You can even see it in the fighters, if you are being truly honest with yourself. Among the elites, hands are faster, punches look that bit heavier, bodies look more shredded.

The fighters in the old days had things the modern fighters do not, however, and things that are very important to being a top level boxer. They were harder men, used to living harder lives and working hard. They were better technically because they spent more time with those better habits among old school trainers who were masters at training fighters to box.

Top level athletes today are superior physically, to dispute it is ignorance. But that doesn't make them better fighters.

I have argued, though, that the tip-top of this era, who happen to be great technicians like Floyd and Bernard Hopkins, would be competitive in most any era, likely top 10 in any division they have fought in, any time in history.

Manny Pacquiao is a unique to date fighter, who is a solid technician at this point, but is an ATG on the virtue of his tremendous athletic potency, a big portion of which is stewarded by the modern trainers he rolls with like Alex Ariza. Pacquiao in his prime is as fast and powerful a fighter as has ever existed, but isn't as technically sound as some other greats. I feel that is indicative of the era on the whole. We certainly can't bring as many greats to the dance as the other eras.

We have better tech, they had better men.

 

It does make you wonder what a monster Louis would be with modern S&C coaches and a couple years of conditioning.

...Or Hank Armstrong.

 

I'm convinced the coaches who I work with now would have made Louis a cruiserweight or a lightheavyweight.

And he'd have lost his license for being a trained killer after his first fight. Men weren't made the punch like that, thank god. The bigger gloves would have diminished the returns slightly, but damn.

 

This isn't a measurable statistic but you don't even need one, compare a rugby union match from the 1980s when the game was amateur to now. Absolutely no comparison in skill levels when you look at the players on the field. The All Blacks of 2011 would beat the All Blacks of 1987 by at least 30 points I reckon.

Boxing I think is one sport you can argue the advancement is not as pronounced as in other sports simply because the sport in terms of drawing in the best athletes have declined, so you're getting maybe sixth-pick on genetic material.

 

I am completely objective as a young man in my early 20s.

Today's fighters just ain't all that.

The punchstats for Vitali against Kevin 'Kingpin' harm his reputation more IMO. Not only is Johnson a massive bunch of ****, Vitali couldn't get rid of him.

Or Briggs.

I'm not that certain modern conditioning would make it any easier to take a smack from an old school 4/6oz glove in a 15 round fight against someone who is, by the standards of most fighters I see today (probably due to lack of ace trainers) far more well-versed in the art of fisticuffs.

 

Briggs fight speaks very much about Vitali's punching power.

 

Fighting a couple of times a year, cutting weight and without quality trainers? They'd be lesser operators without a doubt in my mind.

I'd prefer to see the better guys from today chucked into any number of era's and see how they'd hold up in a highly competitive time with frequent fights.

 

Either Briggs has suddenly developed an iron chin or Vitali is no knockout puncher.

He's a big heavy guy, so of course his punches will be hurtful. But he is an arm puncher, and even at his best never stopped anyone of note. Multiple knockdowns against Danny Williams, fragile Hide and couldn't put away an out-of-shape Lennox that Rahman laid out.

Vitali is one of the most overrated fighters of all time IMO.

 

Yeah, that was funny to hear about old outta shape Briggs suddenly possessing an unbreakable chin.

When some fighter's best victory is Sanders and he lost to an old fat version of the best fighter he has met in the ring it kinda makes some people wonder - what is the basis of calling him a great heavyweight?

 

Modern conditioning :deal

 

I think you need to separate the issues. You can use modern conditioning without sacrificing sparring experience or good coaching. If our knowledge of the finer points of boxing has deteriorated since the 1970s, that isn't the conditioning experts' fault.

I'm thinking something along the lines of Hatfield collaborating with Blackburn, not replacing him.

 

Fair points, most of it really boils down to genetics i guess. Still i can't see SRR being any faster and being able to hit harder by employing more modern techniques like plyometric push-ups to his regime

 

Granted, Robinson was fast. I think he could still be faster, though, just like Jesse Owens could sprint just that little bit better with modern techniques despite already being insanely quick.

 

george foreman won the heavyweight title in the 90s after losing it to ali in the 70s

duran fought from early 60s and was still beating young, yet unknown but still young who who probably used MODERN TRAINING all the way up to 2000 and the list goes on and on

fact is, older guys know the craft much better its just the way things work. modern training bull**** or not

go to the training forum and youll see guys talking about not running because its the old school way of thinking...jeeez

 

Modern techniques such as?