Old Time Heavies Don't Get As Much Credit Because Their Opponents were Smaller

Only you modern revisionists kooks who can't fathom greatness with their own 2 eyes. Oldtimers knew better.

 

The youngsters will holler that they were not H20 fighters, too much alphabet soup. I thought from my chemistry days that H20 meant water, Ha Ha. The newer fighters look as though they need help for growth, it is called Steroid Therapy, Lol.

 

The truth is this at heavyweight. If you are shorter, have less height, and less weight you better have a lot of power, good durability, and fast hands to compensate. The more you give up in height, reach and weight, the more you need to compensate in the other areas.

Joe Louis is one of the rare sub 205 pounders that could compensate ( power , fast hands, and skills ), just be careful. Simon, Carnera and Bear are not close to Bowe, Wlad, Vitlai or Lewis today. Just because Louis beat the best big me in his time does not mean he do as well vs the best big men in history that appears 50 years later. You can say he could, but with that defense and medium level chin it would not be easy.

The shorter heavies ( 6 feet or under ) without power are pretty much out of the game today.

 

Unfortunately this is true.

Guys like Jack Johnson were called "giants" when in today's boxing circles they'd be small for cruiser.

Also, the skills are better. Modern fighters have learned from the legends and built on what they displayed. It seems fairly naive to believe that boxing is the only sport that has not evolved in 120 years.

 

Johnson wasn't called a giant because of his size.

Better than what? I don't see any improvement from Joe Louis for example.

 

I don't think skills have improved. They've changed with the rulesets. The set of necessary skills in the 1900s are very different to the ones you needed after the Walker Law. A fighter like Jack Johnson was immensely skilled for the era he fought in, and a fighter like Usyk is immensely skilled for this era. But who knows who their skills would translate into the other ruleset?

I know it's a cliche, but it really is a different sport. If the rules are so drastically different, why bother comparing?

 

Good post.

 

Joe Louis is basically a modern orthodox boxer.

 

Athletes are stronger and faster today and thus probably hit harder too. It’s why I have a problem with these hypothetical matchups between fighters who fought 100+ years apart.

 

Totally agree.

I would never discredit a champ or contender from another era, as to be champ you have beaten the best at that time.

However that does not mean i favour a lot of them against the behemoths of recent times, against whom they would be giving up 40 plus pounds and often over 6 inches in height, now that is not necessarily impossible to overcome but it sure would be a big hurdle from outset.

As i have posted many many times before, if a fighter wins a world title then i would never not give them credit for it, they did what 99.9% of fighters never will do, no matter what era they won those titles in, they indeed beat the man in front of them, they have done what most of us can only ever dream of doing, we can all dream of winning the heavyweight belts, as Rocky Marciano is quoted as saying:

"What could be better than walking down any street in any city and knowing you're the heavyweight champion of the world?"

 

Nice, but for example i can see nothing behemoth in Deontay Wilder he just a lanky sometimes thin fighter.
Valuev is the biggest World champion and he was beatable considering this please don't treat these modern overrated
guys( Joshua or Fury)like an untouchable terminators ! They have weaknesses enough.

 

I think that there is a type of boxing fan who is fixated on size, and sees the merit of a fighters opposition as being almost a direct function of their size.

 

I stated
"However that does not mean i favour

This content is protected

of them against the behemoths of recent times, against whom they would be giving up 40 plus pounds and often over 6 inches in height, now that is not necessarily impossible to overcome but it sure would be a big hurdle from outset."

Dempsey beat Willard for example so yes fully aware size is not the be all and end all.

If you believe a sub 200 pound fighter has the beating of a Lewis, Klitschko or Fury then that is your opinion.

Who said that Wilder was a behemoth? Not me.

I grew up watching heavyweight boxing in the 60s and 70s, heavyweight fighters of that era were my heros, so i do not treat modern boxers like Joshua and Fury who you call overated as being like untouchable terminators. AJ and Fury of course both have weaknesses, both lost the title due to 'weaknesses' did they not?