Is Boxing the only sport....

Regardless take the average of top 10contenders in Johnson/Jeffries day and take the average heavyweight today and you'll see an average increase of 4 inches in the HWs height. Thats the effect of more people having better standards of living and better nutrition from a young age

 

A few years back one authour actualy compared the average height and reach of the top contenders of the 20s to those today (compared as oposed to assuming like you).

The findings?

He found that the averge contender of the 20s was 1'' shorted and had 1'' more reach. Both differences were within the margin of error of the study.

 

1. The statement 'only nutrition has moved on and not training' is bull****, if he said they're ignorant on the matter. The fact he has a job as a physio, a job that certainly doesn't make you an expert on sports performance, is neither here or there, the statement is bull****

2. So now you're agreeing with me improved training science has progressed? They didn't manage to take the sport to the same levels and I'd be suprised if they trained as hard, it takes allot to move those records forward so much. They were great for their time but they've been surpassed. Who knows I'm sure Owens for 1 would be competitive today if he got modern training and nutrition, although he still wouldnt be on the same page as Bolt

3. All of the following:

10.21.2

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAJune 20, 1936

This content is protected

-0.9

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAJune 6, 1941

This content is protected

0.7

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAMay 15, 1948

This content is protected

10.35

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAJuly 9, 1948

This content is protected

0.0

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

,

This content is protected

August 25, 1951

This content is protected

1.1

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, JapanOctober 31, 1954

This content is protected

0.9

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAMay 19, 1956

This content is protected

-1.0

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Compton, USAJune 1, 1956

This content is protected

0.0Bobby Joe Morrow

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

, USAJune 22, 1956

This content is protected

-1.3Ira Murchison

This content is protected

This content is protected

Los Angeles, USAJune 29, 1956

This content is protected

-0.4Bobby Joe Morrow

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Bingo.

I wouldn't say old-timers were more skillful, but they were tougher, imo.

 

It is the ONLY sport that I can think of.

But there is evidence to prove this. To my friends I always give the example chain of past prime Ali KOing Foreman.........old man Foreman beating the conqueror of Holyfield (Moorer).....Holyfield beating Valuev (though the judges didn't agree!!)

Yes styles make fights etc, but when you factor in the dates and particularly how much worse comeback Foreman was, it's a pretty compelling argument!!!!

 

I read a lot of sports training science articles and studies and it's fairly clear much of the area is ongoing experimental and full of competing claims and theories. That's how sports scientists and coaches get careers. They get ahead by having different slants on the same basic stuff or by having a unique method or bashing another theory. All have studies and statistics to back up their claims. And with the right athletes all flexible training models will produce good results.

A lot of elite athletes and coaches stick to some pretty basic and very old-fashioned stuff, truth be told. It really depends on the athlete.
Just because there's a wealth of science and writing out there and there's a whole academic area of interest and a popularized culture of scientifically-aware amateur hobby "trainees", doesn't mean all this stuff is practically applicable, necessary or beneficial to every elite athlete.

Training is basic.

The drugs definitely put the modern athletes at an advantage in terms of how strong and powerful they can become.

 

Those losses have in common that Lewis was out of shape and not training as well as he should have; nothing more and nothing less. I'm not advocating that out of shape athletes are better because they weigh more. What i'm saying is that today, athletes (and boxers) can be in shape and still bigger than they used to be.

Great point.

Maybe, maybe not... certainly, a different training regime would result in different fighters, but in the end, you cannot turn a great sprinter into great marathon runner, and vice versa. For the same reason, i'm not sure if Jeffries could be effective enough over 12 rounds, where his stamina and durability only get to show for perhaps 4 rounds. And although Wlad's stamina has improved lately, i doubt that he'd be effective beyond 15 rounds, unless he manages to badly tire his opponent in the clinches.


But in the end, these examples don't really matter; you get the point.

I don't think ballooning down is that much of a factor. For instance, Dempsey (and many other champs of that day) probably gained quite a bit of weight when he fought less than once a year as a champion, including a full 3-year break. But he didn't bulk up a single bit more than you'd expect someone getting into his 30's to do.

Ballooning up and down alone doesn't bulk you up. Toney was still making 160lbs when he did it; it's only later that he bulked (+fatted) up.

That may well be. Girls these days are having their first periods around their 10th-12th birthdays, while this used to be at 12+. This is only anecdotal evidence though; i've never seen an official research on this, but i heard that this could be induced by the hormone fed cattle we eat.

Be that as it may, in the end it still falls under the category "nutrition".

It's a well established fact that people have grown 2-3 inches taller over the last century, depending on which ethnic background you look at. Like PP said, Jack Johnson at 6'1" was named a giant. I'm 6'0 and considered a bit below average for my generation.

But i disagree that height is the key factor. Weight is more important: there are weight categories for a reason, and not height categories. A guy like Tyson who is incredibly big but also fast, light on his feet and retaining good stamina, is absolutely unprecedented and Dempsey or Marciano, as much as i like them, standing next to them would literally look like they're from a different weight class. And in way, they are.

Ali and Holmes were around Jeffries' size, but Foreman clearly was bigger. However, Jeffries was considered huge in his time, and he wasn't a boxing type of guy who was light on his feet. Fighters of that type, for instance Corbett and Tunney, weighed around 185lbs. The cruisers that depend on speed are always lighter than the battleships. Yet, the cruisers of the 70's are as big as the battleships from the 1900's. This is undeniable.

You mention Spinks being champion, but it should be mentioned that when he faced a "modern" sized heavyweight in his prime, he was annihilated like nothing in 91 seconds; and he isn't just any lightheavyweight, but one that ranks in people's top5 consistently. He did beat an aging and way out of shape Holmes fair and square, but should have lost the rematch if we're honest about it.

Furthermore, i'm not really arguing specifically about superheavyweights, but just 210+lbs heavyweight in general.

 

Not in the United States.


Here is an up to date poll of the best baseball players and the years they were active as chosen by the general public:

1-----Babe Ruth (1914-1935)

2-----Ted Williams (1939-1960)

3-----Lou Gehrig (1923-1939)

4-----Willie Mays (1951-1973)

5-----Mickey Mantle (1951-1968)

The best gridiron football players:

1-----Barry Sanders (1980s-1990s)

2-----Walter Payton (1970s-1980s)

3-----John Elway (1980s-1990s)

4-----Jim Brown (1957-1965)

5-----Jerry Rice (1980s-2000s)

The best basketball players:

1-----Michael Jordan (1985-2001)

2-----Bill Russell (1956-1969)

3-----Magic Johnson (1980-1995)

4-----Oscar Robertson (1960-1974)

5-----Wilt Chamberlain (1959-1974)

The best boxers:

1-----Muhammad Ali (1960-1981)

2-----Rocky Marciano (1947-1955)

3-----Joe Louis (1934-1951)

4-----Sugar Ray Robinson (1940-1965)

5-----Roberto Duran (1967-2001)


Baseball has the most retro look for its greatest players as picked by the general public in the United States.