There's been many fighters of the last 20-30 years who were better than fighters of 50-100 years ago. There's nothing wrong with making that claim. The issue is, he's claimed that boxing has progressed, and it keeps progressing, and it's unthinkable to suggest a fighter of 40 years ago could compete with a fighter of today, on the grounds that a sprinter of 40 years ago wouldn't have been able to beat Usain Bolt in a race. It makes me cringe when I read that. Any knowledgeable fan of boxing will know that there's fighters of today who would have beaten fighters of the past, and there's fighters of the past who would have beaten fighters of today. Boxing does not progress each decade. The fighters of today aren't better than the fighters of 20-30 years ago, in the way that today's sprinters are faster than the sprinters of 20-30 years ago. It's just ridiculous. Today's top 10 MW's would be eaten up by the MW's of the 80's and 90's. Slavic is an absolute fool. If he's trolling, it isn't funny, and if he's serious, it's embarrassing.
:good The majority of people's opinions don't take into account the psychological side of things. Like you've said, there's a chance that Wlad could have been extremely cautious, which could have had a huge impact in the outcome of the fight.
so NO is your answer that they aren't all inherently more mobile more skilled more talented. took a while for an answer but thank you for it. So you are actually disagreeing, not agreeing, with your friend on HWs being more skilled mobile talented. thank you.
those guys he beat? why do you enjoy presenting a failed argument repeatedly? besides this is wladdie Louis, if you wish to fail about Lennox again you should start a new thread.
after you changed your original question by adding more specific details so I could answer it clearly :good look how you evolved the exact clarity of your question adding finally, "they aren't all inherently more mobile more skilled more talented" ,,, that wasn't there to start with you confused trickster :nono you phrased it as one or the other which I objected to only to have you refuse to accept it until TODAY while trying to pretend I didn't have a fair point what a coward :nono plus I don't know who you mean by my friend, I was replying to you, Herol, you are so gutless its entertaining :deal go reread our posts again if you claim I am full of it :thumbsup
yeah I don't take Slavic too seriously, I was just bugging Herol because he's entertaining :good as far as,,, "The issue is, he's claimed that boxing has progressed, and it keeps progressing, and it's unthinkable to suggest a fighter of 40 years ago could compete with a fighter of today, on the grounds that a sprinter of 40 years ago wouldn't have been able to beat Usain Bolt in a race." yes I agree that this model doesn't work for boxing as it does sprinting,,, never thought it did, :thumbsup I do think that there are more BIG guys that are mobile and talented today when compared to past BIG guys,,, I am talking 220lb plus type of guys over 6.3.
course I mean comparing like for like ranked guys, its what everyone who has posted on here means. I don't know why you chose to interpret my post differently from everyone elses. BUt since then you've answered NO they aren't, showing you now disagree with your pal's terrible posts, so its all good.
But what *I* want to know is HerolGee'd honest opinion of Wlad :think Nobody has ever heard it before.
surely you arent asking me to point out the posts where I've stated my opinion that hes a fairly good fighter within a very narrow range of skills, and with excellent management and media-friendly image. because it would make you a liar.