Old Time Heavyweights Being More Skilled - Convince Me

There are more active boxers now then there were 20 years ago because it is a global sport. There was always plenty of money to be made in Baseball, Football or Basketball in the 70's-90's. That did not limit the boxing talent pool in the 70's-90's.

 

I would take Moore.

 

I wouldn't want to take Moore on.

 

Historically, boxing always coexisted with other US sports by getting the "leftovers"- the guys whose size or skills didn't fit other sports. The choice for many wasn't boxing or the NFL, NBA, or MLB, it was boxing or nothing. People always point to the Heavyweight division-but what sport, honestly, would most great heavyweights like Larry Holmes, Joe Frazier, and Sonny Liston play at the professional level if they weren't fighters? None, that's what. If that was what it was all about, we'd see the lighter weight pipeline as filled as ever- the lack of great US lightweight and welterweight depth has nothing to do with other sports cannibalizing them, for example.

The gym point is the key, and that's a direct result of the smear campaign waged on the sport by detractors, which succeeded in lowering the mainstream prestige of the sport here. Without the gyms or mainstream interest, more young US potential fighters never wind up in boxing, or in any other pro sport.

 

While that's true, boxing was still a higher profile sport back in the 70's and 80's. The money Tyson and Holyfield were earning dwarfed the purses Klitschko collects today. Look what Hagler and Leonard earned for their fight back in '87.
Since the 80's/90's, many gyms have closed down and I don't think that can be argued.
With that, has gone a lot of first-hand knowledge.

While to an extent the sport has become more global, the top trainers are still US-based. I doubt trainers in the Ukraine or wherever can even come close to the knowledge of many US trainers of yesteryear who we have never even heard of.

 

You make good points, size is important but only 1 factor, saying a 205lb fighter would be unsuccessfull today is laughable, given the 90s were far superior and a 205lb fighter beat the best

Also a 190lb beat and shutout 1 of this decades best, and a fat middlweight beat most of the contenders of the 00s division and he wouldnt weigh over 190lbs if he was in shape, next they'll be telling me 50lbs of fat is a big advantage

 

there has always been good boxers/fighters and then there was your good brawlers but on average the boxers of the past were better at glove blocking,slipping,feinting,rolling,conditioning ect. ect. I.M.O. TODAY HALF OF THESE SKILLS ARE UNSEEN TODAY EXCEPT FOR A CHOSEN FEW- some may be related tofewer fights today,bigger gloves,less rounds,more money ect. ect

 

Actually, the 205lbs fighter you speak off did not beat the best (Lewis) and was bested by Bowe, though he did beat Tyson.

What's more, the fights he DID win, were all over 205lbs, so you're exaggerating.

 

Sure, I made several of these points myself in a previous post. Things aren't ever black and white, but it's hard to get past the fact that top HWs under 210 lbs have become a rare commodity in the last 30 years. And the best of them (Holyfield) doesn't have a very good record against the big skilled guys he fought.

 

Iono if its so much the older guys had more skill, they just were so active, fought so frequently, that they couldnt help but improve.

 

A 210-pound man today wouldn't attempt to take on the bigger guys at heavyweight, not when bulking up seems like such a winning formula. He would instead train down to cruiserweight, which is the trend among men his size in normal situations.

The mania that is 'bigger is better' has produced a type of skittishness ingrained within the smaller fighters. That is no reflection on the big dudes themselves, however. Many past greats would totally embarrass some of the fighters today.

If the cruiserweight division never existed, 210-pound men would be fighting the 240-pound men with mixed results. Size in and of itself is not a major determinant.

 

There could be some truth to this, who knows. But it's too much unbased hypothizing for me to put much stock in it. HW is where all the money is. Hard to believe that pro fighters are so superstitious that they wouldn't go where the money are. After all, some cruisers (and even smaller men like Toney and Jones) have tried their hand at HW, but they haven't had much success against the skilled giants (please don't use Byrd-Vitaly as example).

 

When they do fight the heavyweights, they do not generally fit the 210-pound catergory that is being thrown around here is what I'm saying. They bulk up (or fatten up if you're James Toney).

 

Ok. But I'm anyhow not convinced that this worlds skilled 210-pounders are being kept from going for the big money by some mental block or superstition.

 

The point I'm making is that there are no skilled 210-pounders because skilled 210-pounders are often disguised as 230-pounders or 197-pounders. I'm in no way suggesting that if we take away the cruiserweight division we would immediately find a replacement for Wlad. Wlad is a borderline head-to-head great, and can only be beaten by others in the same vicinity. What I'm saying is that if we had 210-pound guys, it would not be outlandish for them to beat 240-pound guys because size is not everything. So, basically I'm saying, to further compound the current dearth in talent in the heavyweight division there is indirect exclusion happening so not all the boys are getting their playtime.