Stop comparing the fighters of the past to present day fighters!

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by mrtony80, Dec 10, 2009.


  1. mrtony80

    mrtony80 Likes thick chicks Full Member

    8,114
    391
    Sep 2, 2009
    It is definitely fun to wonder who'd win...Henry Armstrong or Manny Pacquiao...Jack Johnson or Muhammad Ali...Jack Dempsey or Mike Tyson, but the truth is, you can't compare those older fighters to the newer generation of fighters. I'd say the cut off is around the early 70s.

    The basic techniques in boxing haven't even always been the same. In Jack Johnson's days, boxers fought with their hands parallel to the ground, not up at their chins. Those fights lasted 20 plus rounds because they consisted of more clinching and grappling than throwing punches. Jack Johnson threw about six or seven punches a round. Henry Armstrong was slow footed, didn't throw a high volume of punches a round, stood too square in front of his opponents, and wasn't nearly as fast as any welterweight of today. A Floyd Mayweather or Manny Pacquiao would eat him alive. Boxing had to develop just like any other sport, like basketball or football. Does any really think the best teams of the 50s and 60s could beat any NBA or NFL team of today?

    Techniques, nutrition, training equipment, and other things have all improved since the days of most of the guys you find at the top of most ATG lists. Henry Armstrong was a great fighter for his day, but how anyone can say he could **** with Manny Pacquiao, or any other top tier welterweight from the last 30 years or so blows my mind.

    I know it seems sacrilegious to say so, but use your heads people...Jack Johnson and Joe Louis couldn't beat any of this generation's top tier heavyweights, neither could Jack Dempsey (who'd actually be a light heavyweight now), Willie Pep, Sam Langford, and Henry Armstrong couldn't beat anyone of today in their respective weight classes. I think that the only thing the old fighters are on the same level with their present day counterparts is stamina and punching power. But one needs a lot more than that to be successful in boxing, don't they?

    By the way...Sugar Ray Robinson was an anomaly. You can compare him to present day fighters.
     
  2. Zerwas1

    Zerwas1 Active Member Full Member

    933
    1
    Aug 31, 2006
    Good post, got the same opinion.
    Sadly some grandpas and dumb people will never get it.
     
  3. Tackleberry

    Tackleberry The Reverse Somersault! Full Member

    8,642
    2
    Dec 8, 2009
  4. arm chicken

    arm chicken Active Member Full Member

    730
    0
    Apr 4, 2009
    I agree with the post. Ali being pre and mid to late 70 s , do you think he would beat Vitali?
     
  5. PToporki

    PToporki New Member Full Member

    96
    0
    Nov 7, 2008
    the whole time i was reading your post i was thinking "bull****. has this guy not heard of Sugar Ray?" but u hit the nail right on the head
     
  6. DemolitionDan

    DemolitionDan ATG and HoF Full Member

    17,643
    10
    Jun 29, 2009
    Great post, this is what I have always thought as well. Some people (especially old and dumb people as said above me) will never get it.
     
  7. dublynflya

    dublynflya Stand your ground Son!! Full Member

    5,727
    7
    Oct 30, 2009
    :good Cracking post!! Full of common sense, except for the comments regarding "Homicide Hank" who I always believed threw 100s of punches per round!!
     
  8. ToneLoneLostboy

    ToneLoneLostboy Active Member Full Member

    1,396
    0
    May 9, 2008
    Well put. When making an all time great list, you can't really rely on a theoretical, what if, match up. You have to go by how well a fighter succeeded in his division, or multiple divisions, at the time. That includes level of competition which is why Ali is held in such high regard.
     
  9. WhataRock

    WhataRock Loyal Member Full Member

    35,036
    18,320
    Jul 29, 2004
    Terrible post.

    Henry Armstrong "didnt throw a high volume of punches per round" :lol:

    Are you basing that on 2 mins of film you have seen on youtube?

    When will people get their head out of their arses and realise boxing is not running in a straight line, its not throwing a ball in a hoop and its not like other sports.

    Boxing has evolved over the years, in certain aspects it certainly has gotten better and so have the fighters. Some of the best fighters that have ever laced them up come from modern times.
    But for all the things that have progressed, just as many have regressed.

    I cant believe people think that modern day fighters are across the board technically superior when guys like Ricardo Mayorga, Paul Williams, Joe Calzaghe, Nicoly Valuev, Antonio Margarito, Edwin Valero, Injin Chi, Carl Froch, Valery Brudov etc etc etc etc have held titles in this era.

    Its friggen hilarious :lol:

    I agree you cant just broadly compare eras..Its not black and white. There are a lot of things to take into account. But believe me guys if you have actually done the research and watched a lot of the available film you can see that things havent progressively gotten better overall..its just gotten different to deal with modern interruptions and changes of the rules, modern fighting schedules and the culture of boxing in the modern era.
    I dont disagree at all that turn of the century fighters looked primitive in comparison but guys from 50 years ago were every bit as technically proficient and talented as they guys of today.
    Just so we know thats where I feel boxing peaked in a lot of ways.

    I was in the same boat as a youngin and I argued tooth and nail for my favorite fighters of this era over the modern greats. But there is a hell of a lot more to it and in time you will see it.
     
  10. J.R.

    J.R. No Mames Guey Full Member

    15,033
    5
    May 26, 2008
    Good points... NO!





    :lol: Naww, I actually agree with some of your post. I do think there is a sort of cut off point where comparing certain fighters of the past to modern day fighters is quite ridiculous considering how much more skilled modern day fighters are. Comparing the likes of Jack Dempsey to someone like Lennox Lewis is absurdly unfair.
     
  11. dublynflya

    dublynflya Stand your ground Son!! Full Member

    5,727
    7
    Oct 30, 2009
    In my opinion the mid-late 60s version of Ali (When "The Greatest" was exactly that) makes Vitali think he is fighting a hologram!! But it probably goes the full 15. As for Ali upon his return to boxing in '71-75, well he didn't dance nearly as much and the "Rope-a-dope" wouldn't have worked on Vitali. That fight may well have been a lot closer than some care to admit, but it goes the distance because Ali was so damned courageous and the great man would probably have come away with a tight decision. As for Ali late 70's- Vitali to be honest I don't like to even consider Ali fighting during this period, but a peak Vitali wins that fight, by UD/ late tko. In my opinion a "Peak" Ali (And we probably never even witnessed him at his peak) defeats every single heavyweight there has ever been!!
     
  12. bladerunner

    bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

    33,921
    134
    Jul 20, 2004
    I stopped reading right there.
     
  13. FinalBELL

    FinalBELL Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,582
    0
    Aug 4, 2009
    I will never compare fighters of the past to present day fighters in fantasy matches. Boring.
     
  14. arsabs

    arsabs Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,743
    0
    Nov 8, 2008
    so called experts wouldnt post on this thread.right on the head.:good
     
  15. mrtony80

    mrtony80 Likes thick chicks Full Member

    8,114
    391
    Sep 2, 2009
    Hell yeah. I think the K brothers aren't as good as people make them out to be. Their success has more to do with this watered down heavyweight era than any skill they have.