Frank Warren was asked the difference between now and when he first started....

So what you are saying is Haye throws 15-20 punches a round because his opponent has modern fitness, and the old timers can do 15+ rounds because they are fighting somebody with old timer fitness. Man thats complete and utter nonsense and makes no sense. It's not more or less tiring to throw punches, or generally compete in a boxing match, because its 2010.

Don't confuse strength with overall fitness either because this ain't Worlds Strongest Man we're talking fitness relative to boxing here. There might be something in modern boxers being stronger overall because people are getting larger, but its certainly not a cast iron blanker rule just as saying todays are fitter is not a blanket rule because there are so many, like David Haye, that disprove the idea.

All the evidence suggests the old timers had greater fitness and hardness in boxing terms, as far as activity, lack of injuries and ability to maintain work-rate over longer distances. That can't be disputed because its on paper and film. Whereas we have plenty of fighters today, that are dieing on their arse in the later rounds, so what gives?

 

The fighters (and sportsmen generally) might be fitter generally, but it's not task specific.

Rugby league players do very little rugby training.

First session in the morning is swimming, then it's weights, then game based drills such as passing and defence.

It might be the same across all sports.

Apart from darts, snooker and gold obviously :yep

 

Fighting 100-300 fights in a career, would mean a fighter is very rarely out of the gym. Fighters today are mollycoddled and spends months out of the gym partying and living it up because they can afford to, if these guys didn't fight they didn't get paid and they couldn't feed their family.

Todays fighters have nutritionists and sports scientists for 10 weeks of their camp, but they do not have that ingrained hardness that is built up from never being out of a boxing ring. It just ain't there, they couldn't hack what happened in the past. Different world. 'I overtrained', anyone?

Todays fighters build towards a peak of physical performance for athleticism, which should in theory mean higher performance than those of the past IF they are of similar quality technically because there is more knowledge, there is more specified training, there is more rest. But that isn't pure fitness in boxing terms, what men of the past built up over their extensive careers and hard lifes, that was real fitness.

 

Boxing needs a revamp from the top down.

It could follow the K1 model where different fighters qualify for the end of year GRAND PRIX where generally the 8 best fighters fight for the crown.

Whilst boxing has far more money than K1..........it could still work.

250,000 Q-Finals
500,000 S-Finals
1 mill Final
10 Mill Winner

Make the incentive enough and the glory enough for them to go for it.

Imagine a light-welter/ welter tournment.

Khan
Bradley
Berto
Alexander
Mayweaher
Pacman
Cotto
Marg


This could be done with the WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO getting togeather with each national boxing council and agreeing that no boxing match can officially sanctioned without there approval.

 

Task specific?

 

Why you pick patterson instead of liston ????? OOOOOHHHHHHH i get it, it dont back your argument up

 

There's a difference between being fit and being fit for purpose :thumbsup

 

Liston Ko's Haye no question, and SRR beats Pac 9 times out of 10 these are no brainers, Pac has a better chance vs Armstrong but still I'm not sure

 

I think that sums it up and I completely agree.

 

Anyone?:rofl

 

Did you just say Haye/Klits have faster hands than Floyd Patterson? :nut

I'd give Patterson about 50/50 chance of beating Haye, virtually no chance of beating the Klits, mainly down to the size differential (lets not forget he would be a cruiser in modern day boxing). Ali began his career, and was in his prime, in the 60's - would he also be a 'bum' by today's standards? Would SRR have lost to the Paul Williams', Kelly Pavlik's, Andre Berto's of today's world?

And no nostalgia from me for the days back then either. I very rarely post in the classic forum and I am perplexed at some of the fantasy match-up results they come up with. But, if you know very little about boxers of the past, then stop making claims like 'Haye would beat any heavyweight of the 50's' etc.

 

Haye would get decimated by Joe Frazier.

 

Haye wouldn't even enter the same town as Joe Frazier unless a restraining order was in place

 

Obviously when it comes to heavyweights Warren is talking complete bollocks.

 

Technique hasn't really changed for a long time.