Modern fighters age slower; 35 is not a death sentence anymore

In the older days of boxing, say from 1900 up to roughly 1960, boxers usually started their pro career at or even before the age of 19 and fought very actively. They were involved in a lot of wars and being thrown to the wolves was no uncommon practice, to gain vital experience. Old Fogey pointed out that the only undefeated boxer to win the championship before the 50's was Willie Pep. They were also on a much more active schedule.

So, most boxers had reached their prime in their mid 20's and were getting old by 30.. most didn't have much left past, say, 33. Joe Louis was 33 when he fought Jersey Joe Walcott, but he clearly was not the same Bomber who stopped Max Schmeling and Buddy Baer in a single round. He fought a myriad of battles, not to mention all the exhibitions.


Of course there are always exceptions. Jack Johnson kept the title until he was 37, as did Walcott. It should be pointed out that Johnson's opposition at that point was pretty weak however.

Jeffries retired at 29, Dempsey at 32, Baer at 32, Schmeling at 34, Carnera at 31, Braddock at 33, Louis at 32 if not for the IRS, etc etc. Carnera and Schmeling had a few fights after retiring, but it's fair to say their careers were over.

This content is protected

However, in the "modern age", boxers often are still respective forces past the age of 30; in fact, some of them reach their primes in their 30's.

Main reasons for this is:

• Longer amateur career.
• More protective management, i.e., less hard fights while possibly being overmatched against more experienced opposition.
• Overall improved nutrition and health care; no need to fight on an empty stomach, either.
• Less active schedules, i.e. being allowed to recover from a beating.
• Experience is a big factor in boxing, and with the slower schedule and safer match making, their experience often peaks not until their 30's. For instance, Wladimir Klitschko had no experience in how to act when hurt by a puncher, and it was only after he won a world title that he found out ..... the hard way.
• 12 round fights have a larger emphasis on strength, power and durability, whereas stamina and conditioning are more important for 15 round fights. Most men reach their peak strength-wise in their 30's or even 40's, whereas a 20 year old typically has better stamina and conditioning. So, the modern rules favor somewhat older guys, although stamina obviously still is an important part of the game
• It remains a bit of an unknown factor, but there is a good chance that steroids have become a part of boxing since the 70's/80's, and they certainly allow one to do things in their 30's that wasn't possible before. Not something i like to mention consider their illegal nature, but it would be ignorant to overlook this point.

To make a comparison of the age at which modern champions retire:
Liston at age 38, Ali at 38, Holmes at .. 50?, Foreman at 48, Tyson at 37, Lewis at 37, Holyfield at 44.

Now obviously, Holyfield, Foreman and Holmes weren't what they used to be when they were in their 40's, but they were able to be competitive with top10 contenders and retained much of their ability late in their careers.

This content is protected

Evander Holyfield was 34 when he faced Tyson and although he was somewhat past his best physically, he fought smarter than he ever had and i think it was one of his best performances. Same for Lewis when he faced Tua at age 35. Hopkins displayed a fantastic performance against Trinidad when he was 36.


Point is, none of these warriors looked like old men.
If you look at today's heavyweight top10, you will see the same thing:
1. Wladimir Klitschko => older than 30
2. Samuel Peter => younger than 30
3. Ruslan Chagaev => younger than 30
4. Nicolai Valuev => older than 30
5. Alexander Povetkin => younger than 30
6. John Ruiz => older than 30
7. Vladimir Virchis => older than 30
8. Tony Thompson => older than 30
9. Sultan Ibragimov => older than 30
10. Juan Carlos Gomez => older than 30

So, only Chagaev (29), Peter (27) and Povetkin (28) are below 30 years in age. And almost all of them are new blood. Only Klitschko and Ruiz are fighters than have fought in the 90's. Chagaev, Ibragimov and Povetkin are relatively new and they all turned pro somewhere past 25. Peter is the only one who started at 22, rather young.

If you do this analysis with the current lightheavyweight division, you'll see an even more older picture. However, that division pretty much is running on fighters from the 90's; Dawson being the exception.



To conclude, fighting a 35 year old opponent may have been legit criticism pre-1960, but afterwards, i don't think it's a bad mark at all. Obviously a case-by-case review should be done, as legends like Archie Moore and Walcott still were extremely capable on the long end of 30.

 

Tennis, track & field are completely different sports. They have an extremely large emphasis on speed, reflexes and stamina, which naturally produces young champions.



But if you disagree, feel free to provide stats that show fighters do not age any slower than they used to.