Rank heavy weight decade s by strength and depth?

The seventies are number one for me and no doubt for many people. Will have a think about how I rank the decades before and after.

 

90's and 70's are the best.

The worst is the 20's, 30's and 40's.

 

The four periods that I would identify as strong points of the heavyweigth division, in chronological order are:

Early 1890s
Late 1900s
Early 1970s
Early 1990s

The decade that was strongest across all weight classes, is probably the 1920s.

 

1. 1970s
2. 1990s
3. 1960s
4. 1910s
5. 1920s
6. 1940s
7. 1930s
8. 1890s
9. 1980s
10. 1950s
11. 1900s
12. 2000s
13. 2010s

 

In my lifetime it would be

1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
2010s

LOL! I've just noticed all those decades are by sheer coincidence, in correct chronological order.

 

Some of the decades that are often held up as strong decades, were actually only strong at one end.

For example there was not much depth in the late 1970s.

The only decade that was strong throughout in my opinion was the 1990s.

The period from 1905-1915 was pretty stacked, but that is not a decade as such.

 

L

It certainly is, Fergy.

Even though I was too young to actually remember much of the 1970s, any decade with Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Norton and the rest has got to right up there. The only real question for me was the 80s or the 90s and in the end it came down to personal preference as the 80s was the decade where I really began following boxing.

 

70's was the best and 90's 2nd. 40 's never fulfilled its potential because of WW 2. Joe
Louis lost 38 months of his prime and the 2 fights in 42 were charity funds to help raise
funds for the war effort. In 41 Joe defended the title 7 x and imagine how many defense 's
he would have made if wasn't interrupted by the war. Going on Joe's stat's it could have
been more than 40 !!

 

The 1990's had the biggest more talent in Boxing history. It all depends what you lable STRONG.The 70's were competitive but were they actually better than the 80's/90's? I would say the 1980's had better technical fighters than the 70's. People use the ALI effect and throw out who was actually fighting after him.

Lets look at the ACTUAL fighters for once and you would see guys after the 70's utilized more technical aspects ,namely the jab and moving more. The fighters themselves were less brawlers and more athletic.

I wont go to much into detail as i know it will be confronted with extreme bias so i wont bother,anyone can see what were strong and weaker eras. Sometimes you actually have to look at what you are studying and thats boxing itself...i'll leave it at that nothing more to say on this one! Of course you will have ppl rank the 60's( even though it stank) bc it goes hand in hand with their favorite fighter ...look no further than posters ranking late 20's/30's /40's even 1800's boxing ...etc...etc....nonsense! These posters need to stay off the drugs and i KNOW this subject is subjective but somewhere common sense has to reveal itself..............lol