ESB Essay Writing Competition: Comparing fighters from different eras

I believe it goes against logic to say the sport hasn't evolved, or that the fighters (on the whole) have not gotten better.
A few miracle workers from previous eras could step out of a time machine and fight for a belt against today's best, but most could not.

Boxing is not a quantitive science. We can measure the progress made in other sports because they are timed or measured. How many records from the 1960 Olympics still stand? Heck, how many records from the 1992 Olympics still stand? The progress in those sports is easy to measure.
In boxing progress isn't always easy to guage and a person with enough knowledge and writing skills can make a fight between John L. Sullivan and Lennox Lewis seem plausible.
Of course, they say logic is overrated and maybe it is...after watching rayrob or Joe Louis fight I have yet to see anyone do it better.

 

Quite a few from the 1992 Olympics still stand--after that point, the steroid testing became stricter.

 

They didn't have "roads" in the modern sense in 1840.

Oh, and that time was done from a standing start as well. Evolution may have occurred, but it's been veeeerrrryyyy ssssllllloooooowwwwww. :good

 

We should only include the more popular events, the records in minority sports can obviously stand for a far longer time -fullstop-

 

Roger Bannister -fullstop- Now every elite athlete can do the same time -fullstop- And running shoes have barely progressed before you bring that up, they are all about marketing -fullstop-

 

Running is a pretty popular event. So is weightlifting. Heck, even the highland games have a good following. Aside from this, "popular" sports tend to change the equipment and technique, which obscures most gains in "athleticism" (what you're measuring).

To put it another way--if I forced you to run from a standing start over barely-even dirt tracks in old shoes, you wouldn't do nearly as well as you would over clay with modern running shoes, crouching from blocks.

 

Bannister managed a 9 1/4 seconds 100 yards over rough dirt from a standing start? Or even 9 1/2 (the best amateur performance from the 19th century)?

And running shoes have progressed--at least when they're used in modern tracks, and likely elsewhere. Have you seen what these guys were wearing?

 

4:36.5 Richard Webster England 1865 England
4:29.0 William Chinnery England 1868 England
4:28.8 Walter Gibbs England 1868 England
4:26.0 Walter Slade England 1874 England
4:24.5 Walter Slade England 1875 London
4:23.2 Walter George England 1880 London
4:21.4 Walter George England 1882 London
4:18.4 Walter George England 1884 Birmingham, England
4:18.2 Fred Bacon Scotland 1894 Edinburgh, Scotland
4:17.0 Fred Bacon Scotland 1895 London
4:15.6 Thomas Conneff United States 1895 Travers Island, N.Y.
4:15.4 John Paul Jones United States 1911 Cambridge, Mass.
4:14.4 John Paul Jones United States 1913 Cambridge, Mass.
4:12.6 Norman Taber United States 1915 Cambridge, Mass.
4:10.4 Paavo Nurmi Finland 1923 Stockholm
4:09.2 Jules Ladoumegue France 1931 Paris
4:07.6 Jack Lovelock New Zealand 1933 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.8 Glenn Cunningham United States 1934 Princeton, N.J.
4:06.4 Sydney Wooderson England 1937 London
4:06.2 Gundar Hägg Sweden 1942 Goteborg, Sweden
4:06.2 Arne Andersson Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:04.6 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1942 Stockholm
4:02.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1943 Goteborg, Sweden
4:01.6 Arne Andersson Sweden 1944 Malmo, Sweden
4:01.4 Gunder Hägg Sweden 1945 Malmo, Sweden
3:59.4 Roger Bannister England 1954 Oxford, England
3:58.0 John Landy Australia 1954 Turku, Finland
3:57.2 Derek Ibbotson England 1957 London
3:54.5 Herb Elliott Australia 1958 Dublin
3:54.4 Peter Snell New Zealand 1962 Wanganui, N.Z.
3:54.1 Peter Snell New Zealand 1964 Auckland, N.Z.
3:53.6 Michel Jazy France 1965 Rennes, France
3:51.3 Jim Ryun United States 1966 Berkeley, Calif.
3:51.1 Jim Ryun United States 1967 Bakersfield, Calif.
3:51.0 Filbert Bayi Tanzania 1975 Kingston, Jamaica
3:49.4 John Walker New Zealand 1975 Goteborg, Sweden
3:49.0 Sebastian Coe England 1979 Oslo
3:48.8 Steve Ovett England 1980 Oslo
3:48.53 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Zurich, Switzerland
3:48.40 Steve Ovett England 1981 Koblenz, W. Ger.
3:47.33 Sebastian Coe England 1981 Brussels
3:46.31 Steve Cram England 1985 Oslo
3:44.39 Noureddine Morceli Algeria 1993 Rieti, Italy
3:43.13 Hicham El Guerrouj Morocco 1999 Rome, Italy



It is ridiculous to argue against this and I know you are fully aware of that fact -fullstop-

 

In the last 30 years the progress in running shoes is negligible -fullstop- They might be slightly more comfortable now, but that is it -fullstop-

 

I see a progression of records owing a bit to training and at least as much to equipment and technical factors, which supports my point.

Why would I argue for something that I know is incorrect? What on earth would I have to gain? It's a boxing forum, for crying out loud.

 

You have a good point C_T about the different equipment and steroids and the like. It definitely does blur the issue.

I'm not a big fan of this old v modern debate in any event. I participate in those matchups because it's fun to hear other viewpoints (and often I play devil's advocate anyway) but away from this site I could really care less.

Can't we just appreciate fighters from all eras and leave it at that? I can appreciate a Ketchell in his own right without wondering how he'd stack up to Hagler. It just doesn't interest me all that much.

 

In a pair of 1970s running spikes I'd be less than half a second slower than in modern spikes -fullstop- It is almost purely down to training methods before the Africans take over -fullstop-

 

Well, like I said: I am referring to professional records made in the 1840's. By '79, progress had slowed down. But then, after '79 there were not many quantum leaps, but rather a slow and gradual increase.

 

The minimalistic running shoes with little cushioning is the best, modern shoes often do more damage than good -fullstop-