Is this a terribly weak heavyweight era?

I actually wouldn't lump Whyte in with the rest of those you named. Within his style (aggressive tank-like power-punching swarmer) he is actually fairly well skilled.

Miller is also not woefully devoid of craft (mind you, not saying he's a master, he's okay), more so fitness.

Wilder has improved a hair since his pre-championship run in the pros, but ...still just a one-handed power-reliant windmiller.

Breazeale is like if you took prime Bowe, put a dimmer on a lot of his best attributes, and gave him serious brain damage.

Kownacki's just a lump.

 

Agreed. But there is good talent on the way up. Big guys who can box and hit

 

Yeah, I wouldn't quite lump Whyte in with those other names since he's got a bit of craft, but every now and again he'll throw a really wild looking shot like that crazy left hook that spins him half around, or that awful overhand right that comes straight out of Wilder's handbook.

Kownacki is basically the Polish Arreola with a bigger belly and a slightly better jab.

Lol at Breazeale.

 

Ali, Foreman and Frazier never lost to lesser fighter in general. They beat many contenders, only losing to each other.

The depth was much better then.

The current group has upsets vs non greats and far less wins over top ten opponents. There is the difference.

 

I tried looking over the rankings year by year. It's extremely rare for there to be more than one pound per pound fighter per division. It's pretty rare for there to be four very good guys even. Usually what happens is you get one dominant champ. He reigns for about five years and in that time once a year you get an exceptional challenger. A guy beats five exceptional challengers and he's an ATG. People don't usually have ten amazing wins on their record because the level of talent in their divisions usually don't supply that many. Instead of counting greatness in terms of notable opponents we tend to count by top ten contenders beaten or title defenses, because often there isn't a notable opponent to be found like during Wlad's reign. That's why Crawford and Lomachenko's CVs are full of unimpressive bodies even though they've moved up through three divisions searching for challengers. They arrive in those divisions at the wrong time when they have cooled down and there's nobody to fight, although Loma could fight Garcia and Crawford could fight Spense if they really wanted to.

 

Wlad era sucked and they allowed him to reign with a teddy bear style for years. Bad for HW boxing.

Fury squeezed past old reluctant to engage Wlad, which makes me believe this era is even worse, given Fury is clearly the top dog today. Old Wlad almost had AJ out of there but lacked the killer instinct and AJ found a way, which was possibly his most impressive display of heart thus far.

So yes, this era is poor compared to the golden era and the pre-Klit Lewis period. AJ got KOed by a tub of lard with great skills who then decided to layer his lard with fat. Wilder has power as his only means of winning. Fury has mental issues and really needs to fight AJ and then Usyk once proven at HW. One of the younger generation may have what it takes, but all I see is plodders who get tired after 3 rounds relying on big shots to end the fight. Usyk may show this era what it means to box 12 rounds with sound boxing fundamentals and the ability to land without taking significant damage.

 

A bit weaker than Klitchko era

 

It is not a great era. I think Lennox Lewis would have walked through both Wilder and Joshua, but Fury I think he would edge but it would be close. Fury is the only really top quality fighter this era at heavyweight.

 

This is fighting, people want to see the big boys, the larger than life guys, the most powerful, not 140lb manlets.

 

All the talent is in the cruiserweight division,which historically was the old heavyweight division before the arrival of the Superheavy’s. I’d say the Klitschko and Lewis era’s were superior to the modern. Only Fury and Joshua fit the description of elite talents, everyone else is just decent. Wilder is just a puncher, who benefited from careful matchmaking, Ruiz is decent, Parker is decent, none of these guys are better than prime Povetkin, Chaagev or Haye. Ibragimov could box circles around everyone with the exception of Fury.

 

STFU boomer. people every decade complain about "weak divisions"

 

Rummy made a video about this, sort of. He ranked top ten in the division by decade. He used ring ratings over ten years to be objective.

This content is protected

1930s
1.Max Schmeling
2.Joe Louis
3.Primo Carnera
4.Max Baer
5.Jack Sharkey
6.King Levinsky
7.Jim Braddock
8.Tony Galento
9.Lou Nova
10.Tommy Loughran
1940s
1.Joe Louis
2.Tami Mauriello
3.Jimmy Bivins
4.Jersey Joe Walcott
5.Elmer Ray
6.Turkey Thompson
7.Lee Q. Murray
8.Lee Savold
9.Billy Conn
10.Ezzard Charles
1950s
1.Rocky Marciano
2.Ezzard Charles
3.Floyd Patterson
4.Nino Valdes
5.Zora Folley
6.Willie Pastrano
7.Bob Baker
8.Jersey Joe Walcott
9.Eddie Machen
10.Ingemar Johansson
1960
1.Muhammad Ali
2.Floyd Patterson
3.Sonny Liston
4.Zora Folley
5.Ernie Terrell
6.Joe Frazier
7.Jimmy Ellis
8.George Chuvalo
9.Eddie Machen
10.Cleveland Williams
1970
1.Muhammad Ali
2.George Foreman
3.Joe Frazier
4.Ken Norton
5.Ron Lyle
6.Larry Holmes
7.Jimmy Young
8.Jerry Quarry
9.Oscar Bonavena
10.Earnie Shavers
1980
1.Larry Holmes
2.Michael Dokes
3.Tim Witherspoon
4.Pinklon Thomas
5.Mike Tyson
6.Mike Weaver
7.Gerry Coetzee
8.Greg Page
9.Michael Spinks
10.Evander Holyfield
1990
1.Evander Holyfield
2.Lennox Lewis
3.Michael Moorer
4.Riddick Bowe
5.Mike Tyson
6.George Foreman
7.Ray Mercer
8.Donovan Ruddock
9.Tim Witherspoon
10.Michael Grant
2000
1.Wladimir Klitschko
2.Chris Byrd
3.Lennox Lewis
4.Vitali Klitschko
5.Hasim Rahman
6.John Ruiz
7.James Toney
8.Oleg Maskaev
9.Samuel Peter
10.Ruslan Chagaev
2010
1.Klitschko
2.Povetkin
3.Fury
4.Wilder
5.Pulev
6.Ortiz
7.V. Klitschko
8.Joshua
9.Adamek
10.Stiverne

 

Salty Americans crying because no American HW champ so the while division sucks right?