Good post. Environment plays a huge role in this, as well. The real question is, would Muhammad Ali have been Muhammad Ali if he were born in the 1890's and was brought up in that environment? It's impossible to say- I'm of the belief that great fighters could transcend eras, but there's always something different in the end result because of how much of a role the surrounding elements have in developing fighters. Everything down to the matchmaking, the length of bouts, glove size, the accelerated amateur program (if guys even took part in one at all), the way bouts were officiated, the schooling the fighters got, the lack of video footage to break down most opponents...there's so many variables there that determine what a fighter becomes that it's really impossible to project exactly how a career would play out under the different framework. Ali's combination of size, speed, and instincts would mean he'd always be a headache (at the least) for any heavyweight to lace 'em up, regardless of era, though. As long as the environment was one that lead to him becoming a fighter, I don't think he ever would've been less than great. But it is possible that he picked up a couple losses on the way up or didn't have as long of a shelf life he did under the more aggressive matchmaking of the day.
Really? So would you want a doctor from the early 20's performing open heart surgery on you? Or would you allow a 20's era architect to build the apartment building that you and your family may live in? Come on dawg, it does have a lot to do with it and it does make a difference, I'm not trying to disrespect the old time fighters, but evolution is natural.
oh no, NO WAY! George Mikan would DESTROY Shaq in the paint, and runners back then were soooooo fast... oh wait a minute... today's high school sprinters beat world records from the 20's, never mind that, and boxing is different anyway! They were supermen who could fight 50 hard rounds and take shots right on the chin and obviously the human race has totally devolved in the last 10 generations! hahahahahah this whole conversation is stupid. If you think Dempsey could hang with any decent heavyweight today, you're stupid. Sorry.
I see where your going with this. Think about it. Not because something is old or from a different time does it ALWAYS mean it's going to be inferior to something newer. I wouldn't generalize on something like that. I would have no problem a great architect from the 20's or even the middle ages build me something if it's going to look like the Taj Mahal or a castle that will last hundreds of years compared to a 3 bedroom/2bathroom house that will barely last me 50. I'm not saying older is better, but just because something new comes along and seems "great" I wouldn't be quick into saying it's actually better because it might not be. All you need to see if you don't believe me just watch Foreman-Moorer. A former Ali rival from the 70's versus a modern, skillful, young, in his prime HW like Moorer was at the time. And this was the Moorer that beat Holyfield, not the washed up one that got ko'd by Tua.
Here's a white version of Ali and one of the underrated greats. Go ahead and tell me he isn't as skilled as Adamek, Haye, or the Klits. This guy could fight! [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-9gW3lJmVM[/ame]
Any time you see Ali talking with Cosell, he's just putting on a show. If you really want to know what Ali thought about the great boxers of the past you should watch the documentary AKA Cassius Clay and hear his discussions with Cus D'Amato.
and boxers have been training the same way for a hundred years. You think they werent running, rowing, sparring, hitting the heavy/speed bags back then? That there was this huge revelation a few years ago that these things help you train? hahaha...
Or Kid Chocolate, or Ike Williams, or Beau Jack, or Pancho Villa, or Jimmy McLarnin, or Kid Gavilan, or Henry Armstrong. Yeah, these guys couldnt hang with the likes of Nate Campbell, Ricky Hatton and Kelly Pavlik...
No, they are not training the same way. Does Sports Science, Sports Nutrition, etc ring any bell to you? Improved techniques? Are you saying boxing methods have stagnated throughout the years?
Yes, they have. Things on the science side have improved, but on the actual boxing scene things have gotten worse. Less fighters. Less trainers. Less fights. More belts. More weights. Less competition. "Nowadays you've got promoters and managers and publicists. You've got nutritionists and strength and conditioning coaches, and the guy who's the expert in how to jump over the stick and then jump back over the sticks, but nobody who really teaches boxing"-Emmanuel Steward
Ali was not just being cocky. Compare to this video from the same interview, where he admits that Marciano would probably have beaten him: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhIYGB4cWn4[/ame]
