Has Heavyweight Boxing really progressed and is more advance than Past Eras

none taken..


people use the NFL and track and field as comparisons and they are not even combat sports.


my comparison is just an example.

I’m no expert but I think the old ways died out because of the mettle used - something to do with the temper of the steel. once that was mastered they went over board with armour. anyway all the combat skills were lost because until the advent of the gun battles were fought with heavily armoured soldiers who would often get stuck in mud or fall over and starve to death because they couldn’t stand up.. it only worked out because everyone else went in for it as well. Not because it was more skilful or more efficient.

 

I approve of this post, well done sir.

 

Boxing as a whole has not progresed tbh.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5clfV1gZV0A[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ9icxBuqWA&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jrnlXixTgc&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4F1YxI_uJY&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ_Dguh9hEE[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7ZDut_33_M&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pay6XBYfnRc&feature=related[/ame]

:rofl:rofl

 

Nice to see an objective post ,clips of a near 47 years old Fitzsimmons,two actors pretending to be Fitz and Jeffries,a mock spar between Courtney ,and Corbett ,that was not a fight, Solid stuff to base an opinion on, but then you probably thought they were real fights.
Factor in the speed of hand cranked cameras, very unbiased.

Boxing did not improve in technique after the 30s/ 40's. During that era there were many more clubs , boxers and trainers.today it is barely holding its own with MMA.The techniques of slipping ,feinting, defensive skills are becoming lost arts. The things a few can do today were commonplace back then, there were contenders in every division that had real skill. The heavyweight division stinks, two giants and a load of dross.

 

The best athletes aren't pikin boxing anymore. But training and supps etc has improved out of site. Generally speaking I think boxing today has evolved and become far more effective we just don't get the same quality of athletes.

Just because u didn't see them deadlift doesn't mean they didn't do it.

 

Haye was fast, dynamic and skilled. He had little problems with 200 pounders or even 300 pounders with limited skills. So, that covers about every heavyweight up until Liston and many beyond. He met his match in a modern superheavy who had entrenched, developed skills of a super heavy (control of distance and pace through a great jab and footwork, ability to clinch inside and wear down, superior athletic talent). As I don't see too many (re:any) of those pre-Lewis, I think he does fine. He certainly had the speed and power.

Peters does better than Two Tony, at his best analogous to a Ron Lyle with better power. But Peters (like Arreola up until now) lacked work ethic and paid for it. At least Lyle trained to a T. Oddly, Adamek does just fine in any era up until recently. Dedicated, talented, good skills. I don't see him beating Liston, Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Bowe... etc., but he would make a name himself a la Quarry and probably pull off some big wins. Pre-Liston, he would be better even.

 

The waist size has evolved. Greatly.

 

Valuev had a better heavyweight career than Haye did. A 50 year old Holyfield fought a better fight against Valuev than Haye did. Some people even say Haye lost the fight. The fight stunk to high heaven, nothing for Dave to write home about. Now compare how Dempsey won his title from Willard, Tyson from Berbick etc.

Many great fighters came before Lewis If you dont see that, then this conversation is very pointless. I see most ATGs knocking Haye out, other than maybe Ali due to his lack of power.

Peters and Arreola both lack work ethic. [/quote]
Neither Peters nor Arreola should even be mentioned in the same sentence s Ali, Bowe or Foreman