Have boxing skills progressed, or have they regressed?

It's progressed from where it was in 1890, reaches it's zenith in the 1930s-1960s, declines a little after the 70s to now when we are at about the level of the 1910s or 20s.

 

Infighting, feints, and body punching have regressed



Out fighting, combinations, and the concept of a jab has progressed

 

The consensus is boxing has benifited from modern training techniques.

If that were true fighters wouldn't be so poorly conditioned. Froch and Mayweather could be two of the best out there in terms of stamina.
Froch's training regime is old school , running up hill etc, and Folyd puts in grueling hours like the old timers.

Over all the standard of conditioning is pretty poor.

Showmanship has diminished slightly. Guys dont seem to underatand the importance of playing to the crowd and putting on a show for the people.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

They have egressed.

 

They have dispersed.

 

They retire with their health because the level of oppostion is nowehere near as tough!
I also fail to see any evidence of today's fighter's jabs being anywhere near as effective as previous generations? So many now jab from the shoulder and fail to return it to the guard after firing it, Vlad being a prime example. If there were more depth of good fighters and more schooled opponents this would be exposed critically. imagine what Frazier, Marciano or Tyson would do to an opponent who failed to return his jab to his guard after punching.
And anyone who thinks infighting and feints are no longer as necessary is a tad delusional. Tell that to Floyd, Canelo, Manny, Ward to name a handful of good fighters who regularly employ the feint and body hooks.

I also love this phrase "modern training techniques". Will someone please enlighten me on these amazing "new" techniques that set the modern fighters training so far ahead? Just name the techniques for me please.

 

What a ****ing surprise! How did I know you would favour modern fighters? The answer to the thread is not straight forward imo. There are fighters with great skills now, like Floyd and Marquez, so I don't think it's a case of skills regressing as such. What I think has happened is there are fewer great fighters generally because there is less competition.

You will refute this because you don't rate the old timers, but Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Kid Gavilan and Ray Robinson had great skills. They also had tough fights because it was unavoidable! I don't think it's a case of modern fighters being "smarter" at all. Is Khan smart? I think he is an accident waiting to happen! Lennox Lewis, who you rave about had his share of wars, as did Holyfield.

As I say, I think there are great fighters with subtle skills in all eras. There are people who could point out things to you and me about past fighters or current ones that we hadn't noticed, I dare say.

 

Good stuff, ribtickler-

There were 10 times as many boxing gyms and it had 10 times the popularity at its zenith. You really couldn't escape good opposition because every division was 10 times as deep with talented, tough, well-schooled guys.

And just a word on Khan: he already had some "accidents" in the ring...

 

.....just looked at lewis-klitscho again last night.

if these are examples of the best heavyweghts around....regressed!!!!\
terrible wide leg stances......terrible form in general. each was fighting against someone his own size so neither had that advantage they might have against the smaller heavies of the past, which is the argument usually made that the big guys are superior. well, certainly not in style or basic rudiments.

 

So Jack Johnson had worse balance than todays's HW?
Or Louis?
I take it you've at least been in a pro gym and had the basics taught or you've seen them taught? fThe basics in any pro gym is to ensure the front foot is forward and turned inward slightly which turns the torso and gives the opponent less of a target area.
The back foot should be on the balls of the foot and is the base for pushing which starts the punch as well as the anchor that moves the fighter in and out of range.
At no point should the two feet come together which puts the fighter off balance, negates his own power and leaves him succeptible to counter attacks.
From this pojnt of view the guy earlier was correct when assessing the Klitschko/Lewis. Entertaining yes, technically more adept than the old HWs of yesteryear, of course not.

 

Lenox Lewis never had good footwork imo..

Tucker did 12 rounds and survived a couple of knockdowns by having better movement than Lennox.

 

I can't talk to you, mate. You have no ****ing clue. Bigger is better. Newer is better. Absolute ****ing ****. I bet you wouldn't call me a fool to my face; I'd show you an old school left hook to the body.

 

Toney is the way is now because he clearly carried on fighting too long. It's testament to those "old school skills" that he could compete when overweight and out of shape with those big "athletic" heavyweights of a few years back.