How our forum compares eras

Speed is relatively easy to gauge, IMO. Look at the referee and adjust accordingly.

Of course, what looks good to some isn't going to look good to everybody, but amongst open-minded, unbiased fans with an understanding of the craft it's possible to arrive at a general consensus.

 

He's a bum who, even to get as far as he did, needs so much anabolic and performance-enhancing drugs in his system he can't even pass the tests.
Popped for 4 different instances for 3 different substances inside a week, the first time he ever entered a proper testing programme.

No surprise really. He looks like a powerlifter, lifts like a powerlifter, and has good stamina for a 300 pounder.
There's a reason he looks completely different to the other boxers.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, as they say.

 

Yeah... if only it were this easy!

But people see what they want to see - and often opinions are so far apart, that no consensus will ever be possible.

 

The 12 round era slowly (didn’t happen over night) killed boxing for me. I understand the health reasons but to me it changed the game. All of a sudden we saw less priority on stamina and conditioning and more focus on strength and gaining weight. If you only have to be good for seven rounds why train as hard? Also in regards to the health factor fighters fight Fewer and far between when they start making some money. Which to me shows less dedication to the craft and sloppy fighters. That’s why pre banned Ali was the best HW ever to me when he went on that stretch before banishment he looked amazing. That goes for most of the HW greats as well when they fought often they looked sharper.
That being said my criteria for eras is the eye test. Can’t look at records of opponents as today everyone is so protected and you have a lot of not so deserving undefeated fighters partaking in title shots.
How many stone cold killers were fighting like Tyson Liston Foreman Frazier Marciano Dempsey?
How many great boxers like Luis, Ali, Holmes, Tunney, Lewis or Holyfield?
Did the best fight each other in their respective primes or did they avoid each other for a final pay day when they faded? Avoidance of the best fights is my biggest pet peeve which is why today they need a Dana white figure running the show stating who fights who.

 

It is obviously very difficult, but here are a few things that I look for.

In a strong era you would expect a few standout talents to emerge, whether or not they held the title. If the rankings are constantly getting turned over, with nobody hanging at the top for very long, then I think that I am not looking at a particularly strong era. Real talents remain a factor in the rankings, whether they hold the title or not.

What is going on in the era? Are the top fighters getting matched, is the best talent getting to the top, is there a big global talent pool?

Does cross era comparison tell you anything. If the champion is a 37 year old, who was not the best or brightest of his natural era, then you are probably not looking at a strong era.

 

Count the amount of elite fighters of an era
See how there résumés are compered to eachother
Then do the same with an other era
Then come to my conclusion after comparing the two

 

That might be unfair to eras where people wee matched harder early on.

 

That's just how it is. I guess