The current Heavyweight Division is one of the best eras ever

Big Cat Williams was a pretty good fighter during his day and I'd argue he'd be a top 10 fighter today.

Leon Spinks benefited from matchmaking. His decision to face an aging Muhammad Ali rather than face Ken Norton speaks volumes of his intent as Champion. He was a non factor and a poor representation of his era.

Michael Spinks on the other hand was a gifted fighter whose reputation suffered because he lots to a guy that most fighters would have lost to that night. If he were in today's division I'd argue that he'd likely give Vitaly at this stage a difficult fight (Today's Wlad still beats him) and he would have been a top 10 fighter today as a Heavyweight.

Technique. Power. Speed. Agility.

If you are faced with a size deficit having at 3 out of 4 of those attributes over your opponent will compensate for you lack of size.

Exactly. The weak division would be a total and utter mess without the KBros.

Foreman was certainly a beneficiary of clever match making. He knew the art of it and he never took unnecessary risks unless the payoff was worth it. The 90s was talent laden and deep. Foreman was also around 47 years old.

The mid 90s and 80s were better than today's division. The 80s without Tyson had Holmes, Norton, Witherspoon, Thomas, Tucker, Dokes- those guys were better than today's supporting case by a country mile. Fighters back then at least were able to go 15 rounds (Early 80s) whereas today's guys can barely make the full 12.

I want today's division to be better because it's always great to live in a golden age of boxing but the lower divisions at the moment happen to be where the talent lies. Look at the size of the purses today? Klitschko getting between $10-20 million per fight is eclipsed by Tyson getting $22 million for Spinks in 1988. Douglas earned $24 million against Holyfield. So when you look at the box office stars of today, the glamour division simply lacks that.

Interesting and fair assessment. Though I would argue that some of those guys are just that good. Today's fighters aren't like fighters of the past who were groomed to be champions from an early start. They tend to have shorter amateur careers and invariably come from other sports to try their hand in a sport that can be very unforgiving.

Foreman and Klistchko have 2 completely different styles. Foreman was far more confrontation with his style than Vitaly was; Frazier on the other hand would have the space needed to advance on Vitaly and apply constant pressure. Win lose or Draw the fight will be very competitive and not as one sided as Foreman Frazier. I personally think that Frazier could have beaten Vitaly; he had the right style and he was always up to task for anything.

How old was George Foreman when he fought Schultz? Wilder has done nothing of note and if he's getting hyped up by American media, I certainly haven't heard of it. After all, it's not like European fighters don't get hyped up at home.

I'd wager to say that Lewis isn't the one who is lucky, it's Vitaly who is lucky. Vitaly has gained so much mileage from a loss that had they fought a rematch and Lewis beat him handily it would have changed the perspective of how today's division looks. Lewis was disinterested and spoke of retirement from 2000 onwards. He just wanted a Tyson fight and the rest was just gravy. He met a game challenger who gave him a tougher fight than he expected, he adjusted and stopped him on cuts. He no longer had the same love for boxing and didn't feel compelled to having to go through another training camp for an opponent that he already beat.

The Klits would not beat ANY of the past heavyweight greats. There are a few that they could beat but to claim they are at the top of the H2H list would be a little ignorant. Wlad lost to pretty ordinary fighters and Vitaly lost to the 2 best fighters he's ever stepped in the ring with.

This isn't nor should be an American vs European thing. The current division lacks inspiration and the current champions, while dominant, don't have a strong supporting cast.

I don't think Ive heard Tyson say in an interview that he would have destroyed an ATG of the past or present since he's been retired. He's always gracious and respectful of other fighters.

:yep

 

You are wasting your time, mate! Some of the newbies are obsessed with mirror muscles and think that's what boxers should look like. They overlook the fact that Haye gassed after a few hard rounds against Carl Thompson.

I always find it hard to compare eras, but I find the current heavyweight scene pretty boring, I can say that for sure!

 

Plus against Wlad his cautious approach wasn't just because he was scarred of Wlad tagging him, it was also because he knows if he ups his workrate he has poor stamina over 12 rounds. It was the same with Valuev, as limited as Valuev is, Haye knew he had a guy in front of him who he couldn't just blast out in a few rounds, so he had to conserve his energy.

Now you see people on here saying Haye is "modern" athlete and comparing him to Ali as they are about the same size. But Haye's size is gym muscle, Ali was natural and Ali could fight at high pace for 15 rounds against anyone. Apart from looking more ripped with his top off and probably single shot power, Haye is inferior to Ali in every single way.

Wlad's stamina isn't the greatest either which is another reason why he is also so cautious.

 

The career champions Vitali and Vlad would not even have made it past the 1980s top contenders.
If they were Americans, they wouldn't have been allowed to be such huge long-time steroid cheats.

 

They would have been AT LEAST contenders in ANY era. :nono

 

Agreed. Due to their size, They would be contenders, but champions. That's doubtful.

 

Maybe if today's HW division was filled with drug addicts and winos it would be better received?

 

Yeah Wlad/Vitali would have a real rough time with a bunch inconsistent druggies/drunks.......

 

That's funny since both are massive illegal drug cheats. :yep

 

Their era has sucked for numerous reasons, but they are good fighters besides just their size. I believe they would get far more credit if not for their obnoxious fans who overrate them historically yet no nothing of boxing history. H2h they match up favorably in any era but are not the best in my opinion.

 

Klitschkos don't get any respect from the hateful American sports media, thats the real crime at hand.....

Talent wise this era is nowhere near as bad as some say it is.. I agree that it would look much better if contenders faced one another more often, and if the division received more support from promoters and less negative publicity from the American sports media...

 

Dominate?

 

wlad would do best against a past great of low punch power, he could beat guys such as tommy burns and Floyd Patterson too, perhaps even gene tunney. small guys would be his best bet then, preferably former middleweights who moved up to hw. Ideally they would need to be aged in their late 30s so he can gass them out after leaning on them and running from these comparative midgets early on. Of the two brothers, prime Wlad (aged about 30) would be the weakest against ATGS of the past, you have to figure in that if he can wiped by unfit fat near 40something neverman retirees, then the cream of the crop will take him down in even less time than 2 rounds.

prime vitali would do best I reckon vs someone with not a high calibre of skill, eg the diminutive and less accurate Marciano, though against Rocky I wouldn't rate his chances highly. But there is no doubt that young Vits would be handful for anyone in history.

 

Some random thoughts on both sides of the debate:

1) I've never seen conclusive proof that the heavyweight talent pool was larger -- or smaller -- in the 1970s compared to today. Some regions have improved their boxing programs. Others, like the US, have declined.

2) Most of the size difference comes from weight training and steroids, not increased height. Using Evander as a model, your average heavyweight today would be 70's/80's sized without modern training. Make of that what you will.

3) The training knowledge today is unquestionable better. It's not even a contest. Even though fighters often "gas" in the same rounds as before, their training theoretically gives them more power output -- they've thrown the same number of punches, but those punches were harder than 1970s heavyweights. Question is, how much do modern heavies use modern training? The answer varies.

4) Heavyweights from the past actually do seem to have a skill advantage over their modern counterparts. Whether that would allow them to overcome the large power and muscle mass disadvantage is another question.

5) Some fighters today are overweight. More than in the past.

6) Boxing is a skill sport more than an athleticism sport. There's no way a 40+ year old track and field athlete comes back from 10 years of retirement to win the Olympics, like Foreman regained the heavyweight crown.