You know the problem. You're discussing a H2H that involves earlier fighters against this era, and inevitably someone joins in with the argument that today's guys are just too big for them, period. Often they will stand on this and just repeat it, which is pretty boring. I was wondering, shouldn't we compare fighters of yesteryear with much lighter-division modern ones? To just compare day of the fight weights, and go from there? Does that make sense?
I think the bottom line for most is probably just vibes honestly. Fantasy matches are just something boxing fans do to entertain themselves.
This is why realistically modern fighters don't compare too well with the greats of yesteryear. Look at MW in isolation today. If Janibek has to make 160 on fight night, what chance would he really have against Hagler? If Crawford had to make 154 on fight night how could he possibly compete against Hearns? It's just ridiculous. And then if you compare fight night weights imagine Hagler against Haney, Hearns against Stevenson. Ludicrous.
Perfect example! Is Klit just too big? Shouldn't we be comparing Marciano to Bivol, Betterbeef, etc? Or possibly even guys at 168?
