Earliest period of boxing where modern heavyweights would destroy everybody?

In the ruleset of the day, or under modern rules?

 

Pre-Sullivan IMO.

The Sullivan era was weak, but I don't think a modern contender that'd easilly beat Sullivan.

I think a few of the bareknuckle guys could be tough under a neutral ruleset, but adding in such a learning curve to the rules could make it less competitive.

But the era before Sullivan came about seems especially weak.

 

I think the period just before he came about.

 

The first era where there were less than 10,000 people doing it, perhaps.

 

Never. I don't see modern heavyweights ever easily destroying fighters from earlier periods, since even in the past there was some seriously skilled and talented fighters. Also, not all modern fighters are great and being modern doesn't automatically equate to being better.

 

Sullivan/Corbett/Fitz era, possibly Johnson’s era too.

 

This is how I see it.

Sullivan seems to have been a talent comparable to somebody like Jeffries or Johnson, but I think that a lot of fighters could have had success against the contenders of his era.

 

in American sports, modern athletes are far superior athletically to their forerunners, but far less technically skilled. modern kids don't learn to do anything the proper way, they depend upon athleticism.

 

With all due respect, why not 'flip flop' the modern boys into bygone eras and 'flip flop' the bygone boys into modern eras? A 1990's prime Brown Bomber vs. a 1940's prime Tyson anyone?
But...given your thread...you have a legitimate debate.

 

Francois Botha would rule the pre-Liston era.

 

Louis, Dempsey and Marciano would knock Botha's teeth out within 5 rounds

 

He would steal their souls before the 10th.