Look let's be realistic here. Wlad/Vitali/Lewis would dominate any era of HW boxing

Time to bump this too. Oh, braindead troll mauler. All you got is "na na". You have 1. absolutely no rational argument 2. limited reading comprehension skills and 3. a prediclition for being totally owned at debates. Let's get back to this. In every single one of your replies, you and little boy loudon've fallen with one criteria or another of the traditional arguments my thesis rebuts. Which are:

 

Old ATG's should be respected as great for many reasons, I have Ali and Louis #'s 1 and 2 respectively for these reasons. However, it is for pfp and in era accomplishments, and import to boxing and history they deserve those designations. Its laughable to say they could contend with modern HW's H2H for the below reasons.

1. Progress. It happens. When you look at all sports with a quantifiable result, today's athletes are blowing past the old ones. In sports as diverse as swimming, sprinting, and javelin throwing, the old records are being shattered. In all the innumerable sports out there, I'm not aware of a single record that wasn't set mid 80's or later. Those sports all have about as much relation to each other as they do to boxing, so it would defy all reason for boxing not to progress as those sports have

2.Size. Per #1, it's likely (although not certain, per size limitations mentioned here), that even middleweights of today would easily defeat middleweights of 40 years ago. However, HW is even more pronounced, because the is no size limitation in HW boxing, as opposed to other classes. HW's have been getting dramatically larger, just like the athletes in the sports where quantifiable results are better. So, again, it makes no sense that the same process is happening in boxing as with sports where quantifiable results are getting better, but somehow the result isn't better as well

3. Statistical analysis of size on performance. Other website document this. Old time greats fought much smaller boxers, generally, but when they did fight larger boxers they had less success. Ali's ko ratio against fighters who would be designated cruiserweight today was a good rate, in the 70's. Against 200 and up it was 40ish percent, against 215 it was a featherfisted 33%. Frazier and even the renowned ko artist Shavers had similar numbers. Shavers ko ratio against 215 and up fighters was about the level of Chris Byrd. Shavers was a power only fighter, Byrd was power last fighter, to show how much performance has gotten better. Meanwhile, LL and the K's ko percentage again 215 boxers is 75% and higher. There is no reason to think Ali could have coped with the size and power of todays fighters and every reason to think he couldn't have.



Responses to these facts. Nostagliaists typically respond in one of 4 ways

1 Single examples, whether of a fight a modern fighter lost, or something a modern fighter did that (they say) Ali didn't do. Immature posters like sp love this, which is usually completely irrelevant. Any single example you can give, I can apply to Ali (look at the past thread posts here with sp and loudon). If you find one that I can't apply to Ali, good for you, then I'll give you a single example of dominance for WK (etc) that doesn't apply to Ali (Ali had to rely on biased judges to get him his many of his best wins, WK never did, etc). Ultimately, though, single example's are meaningless, and do nothing to contradict the broad picture painted by the logic and stats above. It is the context of the era that matters.

2. Prime. Ali was never beaten in his prime". This is circular logic, I can do the same thing with LL or the K's when I want.

3. "What's good for one sport isn't good for another". Well, I'm open to learn why not. Just give me some statistical evidence or logical, comparative arguments. NOTE: "Ali has way better footwork, and is just faster and better than the k's that's a fact" is not evidence, it is an unsubstantiated opinion. Posters like sp love to say that is evidence, but its only repeating an item of faith. You can believe that Ali would be the K's and LL as an item of faith, there's nothing wrong with that. Just accept that all factual evidence and logic points to the contrary.

4. Smilies. When all else fails, nostagiaists love using smilies,

So, if these facts outrage you, please comment. I will repeat the facts above and respond to any new arguments. By responding, you are helping keep this great topic at the forefront of the posts, and thus helping educate boxing fans. By keeping this thread at the top, you are helping detoxify fans of the self serving blather given by old trainers and commentators used to demean current boxers and laud old timers for all the wrong reasons. For true appreciation of the sport, we need to speed this detox process and help fans come to grips with the truth.

 

lol "lewtard"

 

52 pages rofl

 

Elroy? Zat you?

I'm willing to bet that this is Elroy's alt.

 

Finally sinking in :smoke