Modern Heavyweight Who Could Be Contenders In The 1930s

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by The Kurgan, Sep 18, 2008.


  1. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    Amazing. The 30's had an inconsistent Schemling, a crudely skilled Baer, a chinny Carnera, a journeyman in Braddock, and lacked depth in general.


    And I could say Louis never faced anyone like Vitlai. Injures define Vitlai's defeat in fights he was winning, not ability or lack of ability. I would easily pick Vitlai over Schemling, Baer, Carnera or Sharkey, and in case you are wondering, Carnera and Shakrey were washed up when Louis beat them. In fact, Schemling was thought to be past his best as well, yet he scored an upset KO.


    Since none of the 30's are power punching pressure fighters, Wlad would do well. Wlad destorys smaller fighters who can't punch, or slow big fighters.


    If Baer, Carnera and Shakrey were that good, please explain to me why they lost so much to lesser talents. I'm all ears. Chagaev still has a lot left in him. I want to see more, but based on what I've seen he'd do find vs the above guys, and would easily defeat Braddock.

    And Valuev takes a MUCH better punch, which is more important. Yes, Valuev is comparable to Carnera.

    We will see.


    In a land of small fighters who often had poor defense, Peter would have an easier time landing his bomb. Peter would not do well vs any of the top 10 you say?

    Again, Alphabet Poltics might make Louis the WBO champ. You can not say he'd unify. THe other champs might opt not to fight him.

    I could agree with this.

    Now for a quick flash of the talent level when Louis became king. Look at the Ring Magazine annual ratings.

    1937:

    [url]Joe Louis[/url], Champion
    1. [url]Max Schmeling[/url]
    2. [url]Tommy Farr[/url]
    3. [url]Nathan Mann[/url]
    4. [url]Alberto Santiago Lovell[/url]
    5. [url]Tony Galento[/url]
    6. [url]Jimmy Adamick[/url]
    7. [url]Lou Nova[/url]
    8. [url]Bob Pastor[/url]
    9. [url]Roscoe Toles[/url]
    10. [url]Andre Lenglet[/url]
    >>>>Very weak.

    1938
    [url]Joe Louis[/url], Champion
    1. [url]Lou Nova[/url]
    2. [url]Max Baer[/url]
    3. [url]Bob Pastor[/url]
    4. [url]Tony Galento[/url]
    5. [url]Maxie Rosenbloom[/url]
    6. [url]Len Harvey[/url]
    7. [url]Clarence (Red) Burman[/url]
    8. [url]Roscoe Toles[/url]
    9. [url]Gus Dorazio[/url]
    10. [url]Tommy Farr[/url]
    >>>Even weaker since Schemling has faded.


    1939

    [url]Joe Louis[/url], Champion
    1. [url]Tony Galento[/url]
    2. [url]Bob Pastor[/url]
    3. [url]Lou Nova[/url]
    4. [url]Tommy Farr[/url]
    5. [url]Max Schmeling[/url]
    6. [url]Johnny Paychek[/url]
    7. [url]Red Burman[/url]
    8. [url]Gunnar Barlund[/url]
    9. [url]Roscoe Toles[/url]
    10. [url]Lee Savold[/url]
    >>>Horrible. Galento the #1 contender? Pastor the #2 contender?

    This content is protected
     
  2. The Kurgan

    The Kurgan Boxing Junkie banned

    8,445
    31
    Nov 16, 2004
    Possibly. At the very least, I think he was consciously setting himself more with his punches, and I think that's worth a little decrease in handspeed.

    I'm not sure about his handspeed, but his footwork is certainly the best it's ever been. Since the Peter fight, he'd been combining cerebral foowork with being a far more natural mover than he was in the early part of his career. Wlad is definitely in his prime right now.

    I want to make it clear that it's not that I'm necessarily saying the heavyweight division is bad right now (I think it's a lot better than it was in, say, 2004) but that the top boxers of today either came to pro boxing too late, lack the dedication or just lack the defence to fight 70 times before they even get ranked in the top 10. If we understand the nature of the game in different decades, we can perhaps understand why the boxers of a time fought like they did and had the physiques they did.
     
  3. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    The Kurgan, i don't think it's him sitting down on his punches. Again, watching a mere minute of Wlad-Brewster I is enough to see him sit down with full power on his punches yet still see a tremendous amount of speed.


    Loewe, you say Peter would be borderline top10 at best because he's too crude. Have you ever seen Max Baer box?
     
  4. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    How would they fare without the steroids, supplements, weights, nutrionists, being starved instead of 5 daily meals? How would they do holding a full time job while boxing? How would they do fighting week on week on the way up? How would they do not hand picking their opposition?

    In a time machine head for head I think plenty would do quite well, but they have it allot easier these days, far more advantages.
     
  5. kickbxn5

    kickbxn5 Active Member Full Member

    521
    5
    Jul 20, 2004
    None of the guys would make it in the 30's. Maybe Toney because of his skills.
     
  6. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,236
    Feb 15, 2006
    Perhaps Peter could have the same problems as Baer.

    There were a lot of non fat James Toneys back then waiting to ambush the poor slugger.
     
  7. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    Well, I suppose Wlad's chin would not be as much of an issue in the 1930's then. After all, if you think this era is juiced, then they certainly hit harder toady, right?

    As far as skills go, the heavies today in general have a bit more and that has nothing to do with supplements.

    Also, the money today is insane. It was easier to stay hungrier in the 1930's. Wlad made 13 million or so vs Tony Thompson! Unreal, but no 1930's fighter saw this type of money, even if you factor in inflation, so perhaps the if the 1930’s fighters made that type of money, they would not fight as often.

    You see, there is a lot to consider here.
     
  8. The Kurgan

    The Kurgan Boxing Junkie banned

    8,445
    31
    Nov 16, 2004
    I think this was the precise reason they had to fight so often. Even with a part time job, the 1930s was such a hard time that fighting frequentely was necessary just to have food on the table. Many of the greats (eg. Walcott) would have had very different careers if they'd been eating regularly.
     
  9. Vantage_West

    Vantage_West ヒップホップ·プロデューサー Full Member

    20,834
    608
    Jul 11, 2006
    true but his handspeed and southpaw style gives him the edge over guy who wernt used to lefties....it wasnt that long ago that there was no real plan to win against a southpaw. throwing right hands isnt a gameplan thats a work ethic hoping that you'll catch him enough times.

    also a novalty southpaw heavy would be a good little investment.



    ever heard of chuck davey. a cutie southpaw who was impossible hit clean or pressure....came across a guy called gavilan somthign and got taken apart, due to kids fast hands and awkward punches.

    byrd i think will rise to the top then get stopped by louis early.
     
  10. SteveO

    SteveO MSW Full Member

    4,255
    14
    Feb 4, 2007
    I'm not sure the 30's aside from a select few were chock-full of talent.
     
  11. Vantage_West

    Vantage_West ヒップホップ·プロデューサー Full Member

    20,834
    608
    Jul 11, 2006
    very good points.
    i know it's a really bait answer but braddocks belif that he could of performed better a better diet.


    also becuase there are more SUPER fights fighters can hold people to ransom to get the most figures and sales.

    james toney made peanuts fighting non title fights while champion and in a sense lost some of his marketability becuase of it....a reason why he got pretty bum deals when it came to fighting the big fights.
    becuase theres more money in single fights more guys dont have/want to fight 3 times a month.
     
  12. bernie4366

    bernie4366 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,681
    22
    Aug 29, 2006
    Any mediocre modern HW would obliterate those old timey guys.
     
  13. godking

    godking Active Member Full Member

    1,140
    9
    Aug 21, 2006
    Tyson i believe was the last HW great fighting at least once a month in the 80s on his way up the ranks.
     
  14. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    Well, Braddock did embarrass Baer and no matter what all Baer fans try to tell you, clowning had nothing to do with it. Perhaps the same could happen to Peter. Toney nearly did it on his first attempt, but had to pay for it by taking a career ruining beating in the process.
     
  15. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    1. The muscles supporting the chin (neck/back/legs/jaw) get better with steroids/supplements, contary to popular belief you can put muscle on a chin. So if Wlad is juicing, his chin would be worse without steroids. It would be worse without the supplements he takes. Strength and power alone doesnt make a puncher, Louis hits harder and more precisely than anyone today

    2. Please tell me who in today's HW division displays better skills than Louis? Schmelling? Sharkey? Braddock?