Oldest fighter you're SURE would do well today...

McGrain might just be on to something there...

What I read about John Edward Kelly is almost word for word what people are saying about Floyd Mayweather now - the skill, speed, reflexes, footwork - How he would dominate higher weight class if he were only just "a little bigger" its uncanny to see how close the descriptions are.

He was so good and so dominant that there was serious talk of arranging a match between the 154 lbs Kelly and the - then Heavyweight champion of the world John L. Sullivan!

Is anyone, even the nuthuggers, talking smack about PBF going head to head with Wlad?

PBF vs 'the original' Jack Dempsey would be a heck of a match up and I honestly don't know who should be the favorite.

But I suspect historians won't be talking about PBF in 100 years and I think they WILL still be bringing up the “Nonpareil” - so Jack Dempsey UD PBF!

I imagine that pick will be like sloshing gas on an open fire in the general forum! But like they said in the movie 'Bookdock Saints' when talking of mayhem- "I'm strangely comfortable with it."

BTW - I also think very highly of Benny Leonard and believe he would clean out the current lightweight division. He lead my list of most intelligent fighters posted a while back...

 

I am satisfied that Joe Gans could be sucesfull in todays lightweight division.

I think some earlier fighters like Young Griffo probably would as well though it is hard to judge without film.

In short the master boxers would be more sucesfull than any other types.

 

I accpet that earlier fighters than robinson might have been able to dominate but i think robinson is the only one i am 100% sure about as though i respect the older guys without film etc i find it hard to say for sure.

 

Henry Armstrong?

Mickey Walker?

Kid Chocolate?

Gene Tunney?

Benny Leonard?

Terry McGovern?

 

i think some of the might have dominated but it says sure, and i am sure robinson would have and only think some of those guys such as walker, leonard and armstrong would do.

 

That is also an excellent pick IMO.

The Old Master won 130 fights and only lost one by decision so if you can't KO him (and very few could, 4-5 perhaps out of all those fights) you were pretty much toast :smoke

I also had Gans in my top 10 list of most intelligent/adaptable fighters - LOL

Gans is often rated in the best of the old time welters - You have him at a lightweight and I believe he could go as low as 130 easily and perhaps 126.

If I could bring up another point - for most of boxings early history there were only eight weight classes. Why is it we always seem to impose modern standards on earlier fighters? Why not take away the modern fighters weight classes every 2 lbs and 'one week before the fight' weigh ins and diuretics and steroids and diet suppliments and elliptical machines and just have them friggin fight in a real weight class for 15 rounds with gloves that aren't pillows?

Why is it we always move the ancients "up" to today - why dont we move the modern fighter "back" and rate them accordingly?

I have a strong feeling that you couldn't get MOST (not all) modern ASC (Alphabet Soup Champs) anywhere near a boxing ring under the conditions and circumstances the 'ancients' fought in....

Just my 2.3391812 ¥

 

Willie Pep :good

 

That is a stupid statement why wouldn't the modern champs go near a boxing ring in the times the ancients fought. I hate the way people make points and only use one view point, if they grew up in those times why would they have not adapted to the style, why would they not have been as tough. Alot of those ancient boxers where only that tough becuase of the lives they lived, why would modern boxers be soft if they grew up in the same conditions.

 

Cribb would certainly be tougher than any modern heavy.

 

Langford.

 

Dempsey and Tunney at 175, 200 and heavy. The rounds were less but it had become common and I believe their style became more modern because of it. It differed from Willard and Johnson.

 

Hotti, did you get banned from Sherdog too?

 

I sure as hell wouldn't rule out Stanley Ketchel's chances against the likes of Pavlik, Miranda, and Taylor...based solely upon his power alone.

Les Darcy would probably be my pick, based on his fighting style (hands high pressure fighter with two-fisted power).

 

Hi Hottie,

Thanks for attacking my statement rather than me personally, that is unusual on ESB these days and shows a lot of class! Please feel free to come after my ideas and arguments! I think a free, open and honest debate is the best way to learn. I'd like to go point by point on this and if you think I'm saying something else stupid, please point it out to me!

AH! First point of agreement! Yes indeed I think that most views expressed are from the point of view of the person expressing it and that point of view alone. With a few notable exceptions I see mostly personal opinion and emotion rather than fact and reason. When confronted with nothing but an opinion I tend to give a little back "with attitude" from 180 degrees off.
I do this to make the point that you can't find common ground if all one side is saying is "YEAAA" and the other is saying "BOOOO". The very definition of irony is when the literal meaning is the opposite of the current meaning...
I believe I was asking people to examine a view different than the prevailing one!

I agree with you again, sir, since it is so obvious that works going backward why don't more people think of these things going foreward and say wow! - with modern advantages Bob Fitzsimmonds would be dominating the SuperMiddleweight division? A division that didn't exist when he fought and seems made for him.

Again I agree with you that some modern boxers look soft compared to the ancients. I'm sure most of them would toughen up considerably (some are already tough) if raised in the dire conditions of the West Virginia coal mines - or in an era of tremendous discrimination. And since we agree that some modern boxers look soft compared to the ancients why is it hard to believe that they might hesitate TODAY to get into a ring with fewer called fouls, 6 oz gloves, 15+ round fights, and very few TKO stoppages and without an attending physician, enswell, modern coagulants, modern training methods, modern dietary advantages, modern antibodics or cat scans at one of the traditional weights with a weigh in the same day of the fight?
That is pretty hard and a softer man might turn it down - maybe?
If the game changed to that TODAY don't you think a few would simply 'retire' tomorrow? Especially the champs, most of whom have their money already...

Since we seem to agree on almost every point - what was it I said that seemed stupid?

best regards,

Vockerman

 

I've seen film of benny, pernell whitaker clearly looks better.