Has Boxing Technique Been Better or Worse

Better technically in my opinion as a whole, but regressing as of the last 8-10 years.

 

Is it just me or did it peak some 15-20 years ago? There was some crazy skilled operators around at that time.

 

Its progressing, has been for a century.

The issue recently is dimension. Defense isn't being layered as well as the old school trainers deemed it should be, plus, a fighter is finding out what works and sticking solely to it rather than open up and round themselves. Wlad Klitschko, for instance, doesn't need a good inside game or terrific head movement, so he doesn't bother. Manny Pacquiao is just fine catching a few, as he can throw and throw and throw so fast and hard opponents tend to get shut down and beat up.

Hopefully that made sense.

 

It's just you.

 

The paragraph made sense, but did nothing to prove your initial point, as there are countless examples of that from all eras.

 

Boxing's technical and competitive peak was from 1910-1970. Quality fighters still existed and were bred and created, but the sport began to wane technique wise from that point.

 

Why say things like this? I just dont understand how anyone could watch boxing and believe this

 

and maybe you never will

 

The apex of the sport was clearly at the inception of the Queensbury Rules, circa the 1880's and 1890's. After that, men were no longer men. In fact, they no longer had penises AT ALL!

Or so Boilermaker and co. would have you believe. The reality is that the sport started turning to fit the new rules and regulations circa 1920, and between then and 1940 you probably had the most technically differing/competitive period in the sport's history. It was around the late 30's and into the 40's that the sport fully peaked, in my opinion. It held onto this sort of mountain top until around the 80's, when the steady, but noticable decline came as a result of many factors. Since then, each new generation of "stars" has been increasingly worse, a few exceptions to the rule (as there likely always will be) aside.

And that's just the way it is. Those are the rules! I didn't write 'em.

 

I would say better post 1950 as a whole. However, technique in terms of feints, body punching, and in-fighting to me were better pre-1950.

 

From the 50's boxers progressed on a upward curve technically right through to the late 90's. I would say that curve has been a flat line or more likely a downward one over the last decade.
I would say too much emphasis is put on padwork these days, and not so much on punch technique. I also think boxers are just not as tough and hungry these days. It could be because standards of living have got better for the majority of us. Also you rarely see fighters matched tough now, thus leading to a lot of glorified sparring sessions and not actual fights were you are learning something about yourself.
Boxing...skill wise has definitley hit a ceiling for the time being.
Has trainers like Manny Steward and Freddy Roach get older, and with men like Eddie Futch and Cus 'D Amato no longer with us. You look around and think are there any current trainers with enough expertise and nous to fill their boots. I like Nazim Richardson but i can't think of too many others who could be regarded has a great trainer. That's what we need for boxing to progress technically, some more great teachers.

 

My opinion is that the Technique has improved over the years. I think that the talent has not improved.

 

Practice makes fighters better.....there is talent everywhere but the problem with boxing today is the fighter´s management......

Everyone wants to protect his fighters....not good for progress of skills...

 

Actually, in-figthing is one of the areas I think has improved the most since then. A lot of clinching and wrestling back in the day.