Prime Muhammad Ali vs Michael Hunter (Boxing Evolution Theory)

You forget that an older, slower, fatter version of Foreman was able to knock out the HW champion when 20 years past his prime.

Where was the progress then?

 

You mean the Michael Moorer that was just 6'2" tall ??

 

Absolutely.

So then take onboard what he’s said.

 

This is a good post.

But we can’t compare any other sports to two guys fighting.

We’re also not doing comparisons from 100 years ago.

All fights are determined by the two fighters match up on the night stylistically.

That means that some of those older guys would have held advantages over today’s guys.

Because in boxing, even the most skilled fighter doesn’t always win. There’s many variables. Many different stylistic match ups.

 

The guy who was just ONE inch smaller than Usyk?

Yeah. That guy.

 

Sizes have increased in sports involving two guys fighting as well. Boxers, kickboxers, wrestlers, MMA guys to a degree (except where sizes are artificially kept at < 265), judoka, etc. are all bigger. If anything, size has climbed more for combat sports than for some other ones; decathletes don't keep getting bigger. (Better conditioned and fitter, but not bigger.)

There are indeed a lot of variables. Some of the major variables are size, strength, power, and even stamina -- all of which modern training (including the illegal parts of modern training) can improve. Which is why fighters have always done roadwork, why steroids taken anyway despite being illegal and banned, etc.

Now, is there some guy from 1973 who might have a stylistic advantage over a modern guy that the modern guy has never seen before, simply because the 1973 guy was so unique? Certainly possible. Wouldn't surprise me. There are broad themes that are still stable across time -- nobody fights EXACTLY like somebody else, but they fight closely enough to prep for them -- but history does contain some unusual people. The same could be said in reverse: the moderns may have styles their past opponents haven't seen very often, or at all. There weren't many guys like Zhang in 1973, for example.

Overall, I think the moderns are better on average. I'd expect the best today to win more than they lost against the best in the 70s. But the best in the 70s were still able to claw their way to the top of a competitive sport, and would have some of their own victories as well. I don't think the difference is so vast that the best 70s guys would look like a bunch of gatekeepers.

 

This is perfectly reasonable.

But this is not what Kiwi has said.

Kiwi has said that today’s guys would have DOMINATED the best guys of the 60-80’s.

Which if you’re a knowledgeable fan, is of course ludicrous. And we know that, simply by looking at who today’s guys have lost to and struggled with.

Having said that, I don’t believe for a second that those older HW’s would just easily dominate all of today’s guys.

As a boxing fan for over 30 years, I know that if we had a huge tournament, where it was modern vs old, that the tournament would throw out mixed results.

That is just pure logic. Pure common sense.

Yes, the fighters of the modern era are bigger. But many of them have less ability than those of the past.

The other ludicrous statements being made are:

1. All of the old HW’s would have been CW’s today.

2. A prime Ali couldn’t even have competed.

It’s so ridiculous, I’m going to have to assume that the guy is just trolling for some amusement.

 

I don't think it's ridiculous to think that. Incorrect, but not ridiculous. I also don't think it's ridiculous to believe the opposite -- that there was something about the 1970s that made them better than today. (Which would be wrong as well, IMO.) Some of it depends on how you weigh the variables. And on what arguments you can put forward for your position.

Most of the old 70s heavyweights probably would be cruiserweights. That much is true. I also think that somebody like Vitali would indeed dominate the guys from the early 60s. Depends on when you're talking about in the 60s-80s stretch.

 

How is not ridiculous?

He said that ALL of the old HW’s would have been CW’s.

And on what planet, could a prime Ali not even have been able to have COMPETED today??

You’re telling me that Muhammad Ali couldn’t even have competed with today’s top 10 fighters?

It’s laughable.

Absolutely laughable.

And especially as the current HW king, has Ali’s EXACT dimensions, where he’s beating people on speed and movement instead of power.

 

No, I'm not telling you that. He's telling you that.

I'm just telling you that I don't find it ridiculous, even though I disagree with it. I also don't find people saying that Dempsey could destroy Joshua like he did Willard ridiculous, even though I think it's extremely incorrect, to the point where there are very few credible reasons to believe it.

We have no way of testing this stuff across eras, and can only give our best guesses.

 

But Vitali would dominate because of his talent and attributes, not simply because of his size...?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

 

He's a talented big man. His opponents in the 60s would've been talented smaller men. I think it's really the fact that he's bigger AND really talented that puts him over the top. Plus, better access to training advances.

 

Nobody hung on quite as ridiculously long as Foreman, but modern fighters are remaining viable at older ages. Foreman was on the extreme end of those guys, but he fits the trend line pretty well.

 

Okay.

I’m struggling to see why you wouldn’t have found that comment ridiculous.

Look at today’s top 10.

Their history.

Look at a prime Ali, and his history.

Look logically at how they’d realistically have all matched up on the night stylistically with him.

We can make educated guesses based on lots of evidence.

Saying that Ali couldn’t even compete today, just defies logic.

And again, the ironic thing is, Usyk is currently the king of the HW division, again, where he’s beating people on movement instead of speed, and with the exact same dimensions.

So: Usyk is the current king, yet Ali couldn’t have competed.

That’s Kiwi’s thinking.

Yet it’s completely and utterly illogical.

It’s just a joke.