Boxing is a sport it is always assumed that the past is better! but boxing has approximately 150 years of history... I don't think we have seen it all but it is too competitive... it is the most competitive sport that exists, there is no doubt in my mind... I truly believe that boxing is still the same. The only thing that has evolved is steroids and some technical improvements... but the talent of the boxers remains the same...
It might, those really old school boxers from the late 1800s fought in a way that seems so damn strange to us. In the Joe Louis era everyone had their hands down all the time. The future might surprise us.
It evolves in the truest sense of the word. It adapts to change, not necessarily progress. You see an 100+ year old film of an old timer and see things that seem odd, if not outright obsolete today. Fighters with their hands low, scarcely thrown combinations, full of clinching, slower pace etc. But you'll see that we view it this way because things are different now. If the shift from 15 to 12 rounds is considered huge in regards to pacing, imagine the one from 45 rounders to 15 rounders back in the 1910's. Today, just holding your hands up and letting shots hit your big gloves is considered effective defence. You simply could not do that back then, the gloves were mitt sized (accounts of the era referred to them as such) and made of horse hair, so each shot was also harder. Gloves of such size make you susceptible to hand injuries, and if you see how often those guys fought in order to get paid properly (UFC fighters make Ronaldo money in comparison to early 20th century Boxers), they had to be careful about preserving them, and that caused more focus on body work and reliance on pot shots rather than combinations. Given all the aforementioned factors, the low guard was implemented. Having your hands up was actually considered the mark of the unskilled, with effective head movement, parries and footwork being the mark of a skilled operator. You see them constantly trying to feint each other out of position in old films, which is what was effective back then. If you brought an old timer to observe today's game without telling him what has changed, he'd think Canelo and Usyk look just as silly as they do to us. There are several early 20th century accounts of Boxers explaining their trade, and you'll see there's nothing new under the sun. Take a look at Edwin L Haislet's book simply called ''Boxing'' from 1940, and you'll see no technique, skill or tactic from today's game that is not in that book.
They also had Boxing at the original Olympics in Ancient Greece. They had Boxing, Wrestling, and Pankration (which was like MMA). Only open weight class.
The sweet science is a fairly refined, time tested set of principles. You won't reinvent that too much, only add to it. But nearly everything else in boxing has evolved since the early days.
Yes Boxing as a sport has evolved but i doubt it will change much in the future. Evolve just means changing over time. Boxing in the 1800s and early 1900s was a different sport with different rules, which is why the earliest eras you can realistically compare to modern day are the 1940s. Their stance and body mechanics didn't look like modern fighters until the 40s and 50s imo. They didn't move their head as much, stiffer, but we have to look at it from both ways, you try and have a modern boxer fight under early 1900s rules and wear their gloves, they won't nearly look as fine tuned and would be frustrated by the holding and hitting, plus as jab is a jab, a cross is a cross, and a hook is a hook. Their footwork fundamentals were usually good They also had different gloves with little padding that effected their punching, they had to be more precise and pick their shots because their hands were more susceptible to breaking. This is also part of the reason many looked to punch in the clinchz and holding and hitting was perfectly legal based on what I've watched, they were fighting on the inside more. I'd assume boxers did more wrestling back then like Jack Dempsey. Referees also didn't do mandatory 8 counts until the 50s, that would surely have an impact on fights. Rounds in boxing back in 1800s weren't even contained to 3 minutes and 15 rounds
I find this quote by George Foreman super interesting and would be very curious to understand this in more depth. 'The men I faced in the seventies were more fearsome than the ones I faced in the eighties and the nineties, with the exception of Evander Holyfield. Evander could have competed in any era.' https://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=196686
it's not evolving as fast as men are devolving. a 20 yo in the 70's had a much higher testosterone level and higher grip strength across the board. its been declining every generation. so your grandad was more man than you, and your grand child will be less. so if an old man calls you a little *****, he's got a point, lol. they dont make em like they used to. literally.
Not in perpetuity. By the late 40's/early 50's, most techniques that are used today had already been perfected. Southpaws have gotten better but that is because lefties are no longer discouraged to fight in their natural stance. The younger fans who insist that somehow Dubois has better technique than Ali are utterly delusional.
Evolved in some aspects, devolved in some. You can't compare the version from early 20th century to anything more modern, because the rules and gear essentially demanded a different style. Middle of the century already had some extremely elite, complete operators.
No, boxing was more primitive in the 40`s and 50`s, Ray Robinson was years ahead of his time and only a few have matched his prowess since, I believe fighters are catching up now though, I think boxing will start evolving in the coming decades with new fundamentals.