I've brought this question up before, but got no answer or opinions towards the matter. I think it's incredibly interesting to note, that 100 years ago, the life expectancy for the average person, is almost HALF what it is today. This is attributed to medicine and technolgoy... But my question is, how do you guys see this playing into boxers ages? Is the prime age extended now? You have to assume that the average boxers prime age today, is far more extended than that of a boxer born before 1900. Another case, in my opinion, on why the older boxers deserve extra credit for dealing with substantially different circumstances than boxers today.
I think so but I also think the infrequency of fights doesnt take the toll on the body that it did in the past, but I think a fighters career can certainly be extended now.
Depends on the fighter. Yes, less fights and better care have given fighters extended careers. The surgeries and preventative and rehabilative care that are available now make a big difference. Plus, no ones being put through the ringer every week and made to fight the same tough guys four or five times each for peanuts. Generally speaking.
True. But generally, fighters nowadays are often producing their best at ages a little bit later than those of the past. It's a gross generalization though. And to put a specific age number on it, "30" or whatever is just absurd.
Yea it's a huge generalization, as boxers find a different peak based on a case to case study. But it seems like you could comfortably say that 25 is a rough average prime age for boxers in the past few hundred years. Where as today, I do feel like 30 is the new 25 in those regards. And Pachilles, you need to check your sources my friend!, because its common knowledge that the life expectancy has increased tremendously, almost by 100% in the lat 100 years. Unless you mean something else by devolved
Not to mention that the rules of "life" were different in those days. You can't really compare an 80-year life expectancy today to 50-year life expectancy back then, because people trained for life differently. In the 19th century, years lasted longer.
Unless they have received horrible punishment throughout their career, I see no reason a fighter should be considered too old to continue until nearing 40's, once again unless they are on a major decline or have received punishment in grueling fights.
lol cmon Pachilles, with new breakthrough in the medical field you can't really believe life expectancy has decreased can you? Its never happened on a long term scale. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html http://www.demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html http://www.efmoody.com/estate/lifeexpectancy.html
