How would the old time fighters compare today?

Wow, I don't know where to begin.

1. Palms up was true bare knuckle when the style different way of defense and attack if you were to research instead of just talking you would realize that.
Palms facing up because they wanted the turn of the fist to add power just like today's boxers, the difference is that they landed with a vertical fist instead of horizontal. The reason was because they tried to absorb the force of the blow over the three bottom knuckles so to not break the hand.

2. look at a Jack Dempsey fight he don't come forward with palms facing up, he fought guys like Sharkey which had a modern style, and I don't think I need to go into why he'd be competitive, just go to the Holyfield vs Dempsey thread.

3. Bare knuckle fights gave the guy thirty seconds to get up, sometimes more. MMA guys could get to thier feet in that amount of time but thier stopped by the ref.

I hope this helps, next time please do some research.

 

Honestly, I don't know how the old time fighters would do today because I haven't been able to take the time and study their records, careers and films. This is something I would just love to do, but unfortunately am unable to right now. Many people will talk a lot, but be sure to take the opinion from those who have actually compared and not just say things because they either think old fighters are overrated or the new ones underrated.

 

So they can't shape? Or Human beings were made different in the old era to take giant beatings?

 

Legends like SRR would be criticized for not having perfect records and fighting too many "bums"!

 

Where is your proof of that?

 

Well one think is for sure yesterdays heavyweights will beat the **** out of todays heavys.

 

Well, since the footage shows they threw a lot of punches, it must mean that boxers of that era had a much better defence than MMA fighters. I would have thought that would be obviously, really.

Boxers of the pre-modern ruleset (Dempsey-Tunney was a dramatic transitional series) would have problems adapting because their entire skillset was conditioned for different circumstances. Equally, modern boxers would have huge problems in the early days of gloved boxing due to the ruleset and conditions.

I suspect modern boxers would have a harder time, since things they depend on (conditioning, lots of available food, comfort, huge purses etc.) would not be there for them, whereas these things would spur on the performance of boxers of earlier eras. So Jack Johnson would do far better in today's division than Wladimir Klitschko would do in Johnson's division.

 

They're bigger today at heavy, but opinions will be wixed...no one can prove jack diddly I think Mayweather could match anyone, the rest are toss upa

 

Yea, but in technical disciplines of T&F Athletics the records are to remain for many years to come:
Mike Powell / Carl Lewis 8.95 / 8.91m;
Sergey Bubka - 6.14 ;
Yuriy Sedykh - 86.xx;
Javier Sotomayor - 2.45;
Boxing is not pure athletics, but also technical skills + spirit/heart.

 

i find theres a bit of myth, legend and fact thats attached to the old schoolers

im so sure that if corey spinks had been born in a ealier date. given maybe 30 bum fights before he made his porper boxing record he would be remarked as...
"a supreme technician and an amazing defencive fighter fighting competativly from 140 to 160 almost beating up another hall of famer jermain "janissery" taylor. his only major loss coming to zab "black destroyer" judah."

i could see it on a cyber boxing bio.

alot of facts for the pre 1940's are not data but by word of mouth or writers in newspapers which is a very biased minefield. nowadays chin has become a major issue becuase you have to be completely solid not even a budge from a punch becuase it is very detrimental to your career and prestige.
back then getting knocked down was nothing. it didnt mean anything at all even if you were hurt bad in the round.