Is peer evaluation important/relevant to ranking older fighters?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Swarmer, Oct 25, 2010.


Page 3 of 3
  1. enquirer

    enquirer Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,206
    26
    Mar 18, 2006
    By the same token the 'youtube highlight' generation venerate guys like pavlik as the 'next hagler' and then wonder what has happened when he gets easily undone by an old timer and a marevilla.
    A lot of the 'modern generation' have no idea of the fighters of yesteryear and how great some of them were. They think 'modernity' automatically makes fighters better,when in truth the last twenty years have been pretty garbage. The eighties were vastly superior to the twenty years after.
     
    enquirer, Oct 28, 2010
    enquirer, Oct 28, 2010
    #31
  2. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    I'm much younger than you and I think older fighters are better. It really doesn't have anything much to do with age. It is absolutely not wrong to think that boxing has had a competitive rise, peak, and fall. That peak is certainly not now, despite the advent of sports science which YOU YOURSELF have said is poorly applied in boxing(and I agree, having some knowledge of it myself).
     
    Swarmer, Oct 28, 2010
    Swarmer, Oct 28, 2010
    #32
Page 3 of 3