Explaining why old boxers make basic mistakes

wouldnt you think thats the only reason they made those simple mistakes

look at the 70s that was really when people had advances in movement that could work in eras after its cause they had video of the 40s-20s to study to see what they could use and couldnt

 

No there was a method to his madness and Ingle taught it.

I read an article on his gym one time and the canvas had all these intricate footwork paths on it that his guys would drill following those maps as they moved around the ring. And some other odd drills. I wish I could find that but he definitely had a unique approach to boxing.

 

Yes, I did mean that but it's different than this:

I think that the most radical people rarely can debate serious topics and come up with any substantial arguments. I don't think it's controversial opinion, radical people usually don't want to talk with people who have different opinions.

You accussed me of thinking that people with different opinion are worse than me. You called me arrogant many times and you tried to twist my words in a bad light.

It's not the first time you paint me as narrow minded buffoon, even though I never did the same to you.

 

IMO it's simple, the rules evolved, therefore the science did as well. Pre 1920's you hardly have effective combos of 2+ punches being thrown, and clinching through entire rounds was allowed, therefore holding your hands closer to your face likely seemed irrelevant. Peak fighter of the period Jack Johnson spent rounds "wrestling" in clinches with a minority of his time being spent throwing punches. Part of why fighters stuck their hands further out and often seemed like they were "jousting" was to get a good grip position when/if an opponent initiated a clinch. When you get stricter rules on clinching as well as innovative fighters such as Jack Dempsey who throw effective speedy combos often of 6 or more, you start seeing boxers hand positioning moving closer to the face for defense. Despite often being called a brawler, Dempsey's Bob and Weave was quite scientific and an example of "defense while on the offense" with effective head movements, footwork, the falling step, and punch slipping, all very advanced especially for the time, compare his 82% KO percentage to Jack Johnsons 52%, Langfords 59%, Gunboat Smiths 46%, Jeanettes 57%, the acclaimed Battling Levinsky being a low 15%. Tunney, Greb among others are obviously worth mentioning as improving the science behind boxing amidst the changing rules. IMO, the late 1910's and 1920's is where you start seeing a surge in improving technique and styles. You have a period in the 1930's pre Louis where you hit somewhat of a standstill with the fixed fights of Canera and the talented but unstable character Jack Sharkey, and a fair numbers of "ehh" fighters like Baer. Louis changed the game with his jabs, angled footwork, defense and countering skills and a period of advanced technique in the sport continued into the 1940's continued with Wolcott, Charles etc. 1950's you see somewhat of a flatline again with Marciano who if anything else, was a powerful and effective puncher while lacking defensive and footwork. Patterson was "aight" fine defense, but lacked power punches and a good chin. 1960's you see again, a boom in technique improvements. You see a cycle IMO where certain eras show more advancement in styles, somewhat based on conforming and adapting to rules, as well as just exceptionally talented individuals who changed the game.

 

I think you're correct... I do seem to recall having called you arrogant a couple of times (when I honestly thought you were!). But the narrow minded buffoon thing... I don't really remember having said something like that!

You know, we've had our discussions in the past - where we have STRONGLY disagreed about stuff. But it has always been in good spirit, without any childish name-calling (which is more than I can say for several other posters). Which I have always appreciated... so if I at some point have deviated from proper behavior, I owe you an apology.

 

It's fine, I probably reacted too agressive this time. Apology accepcted and I also want to apologize you for my reaction.

I know that we did have some nice discussions before and I'd never say that you can't bring anything valuable to the discussion. I thought about trolls that consistently bump old threads just to show how much they hate old fighters.

 

Mayweather wouldn't have been as good, had he been born in that era.
But put current Mayweather in that era and he humiliates and beats anyone he faces, it would be like taking candy from a baby, they'd be helpless against him. He'd reign supreme for 20 years with ease. He'd have like 200 wins and no losses.

 

I never have boxed but have been in fights and knew how to defend myself but I was born in 80s so I had a way of seeing what I could and shouldn't do I never been to good at fighting though I always been better at wrestling

I dont think thats the right word to use unable that means cant I said they tried stuff but maybe they didnt think it would work good so they went back to what works

the best mover back in any black and white era before ali was Jersey to me he moved like I would say a mike or jack but way less polished but for some odd reason his movement is not hyped up like Louis
jersey moved way better then him as far as foot movement and upperbody and he was a better counter puncher on the move

 

I hope you're not serious. Or you haven't a clue and a waste of time.

 

right and floyd wouldnt even have to show off his skills really he would go undefeated same with ggg razor Frazier George smith lennox and any other big/middle name it would be no challenge

 

I am serious. Nobody pre 1930 could beat Mayweather. At his weight class of course.

 

facts I always say how that era and louis era was trash as far as movement they like to say im wrong

I cant be wrong when people like you and others can see the same thing it's no reason to pretend that era wasnt missing alot of advances in movement and was trash compared to 70s-90s it's on video

it doesn't take away from those dudes being legends back then to to say the way they moved was trash it's just fact

 

why do we have to limit his weight alot of those dudes was smaller then even at hw some started at 180 floyd I seen floyd go to 160 I know it's a 20 pound difference
but look at how they moved back then