The evolution of boxing

My arguments are based on logic, rational. There really is NO NEED for me to post up facts about anything. Do I need to post up facts about the exponential increase of the American population from the 1900's to the 2000's? NO :deal

The American population today is 320 million, back in 1900, it was 76 million. In 1940 it was around 139 million. There is a huge difference in population size, thus a huge difference in the pool of available human beings willing to become boxers. Not to mention the advances in medical science that help maintain athlete longevity and health, people today would find it LESS dangerous going in to boxing, than people in the 1900's, who were deathly afraid of dying by participating in such a sport.

You know the boxing pool back in the day was pathetic when the title holders were mainly American, it is the equivalent of Chinese monopoly on PING PONG. Should the Chinese feel any sort of pride when they defeat American PING PONG practitioners? NO. Today you have a multifarious group of title holders spanning from different regions around the globe. You have elite talent coming from Europe, Africa and Asia, as opposed to just the United States. Boxing whether you like it or not, is truly a GLOBAL SPORT now, and growing in many more regions. 7 billion people on Earth, and boxing has reached markets untapped back in the 1900's, the global elite boxing roster is much, MUCH larger now than it was in the 1900's.

Now take in to account that the boxing infrastructure of the rest of the world has CAUGHT up to that of the United States, and in some cases EXCEEDED the USA, there is no denying that competition today is more intense. The Mega athletic powerhouse that was the USSR and its satellites unchained from Cold War bipolarity, are now free to participate in pro boxing, this adds even more credence and competition to the sport.

Lennox Lewis and the Klitschko's are known all over the globe, they are household names in their respective regions. Povetkin is a household name in the Russian Federation and all its 147 million inhabitants. Americans unfortunately do not care much about foreign talent, they much prefer to know the names of their own.

Advanced training, superior nutrition, Performance enhancing drugs are now accessible to MORE athletes. This means competition is now more superior and competitive than back in the 1900's. Even if you were to give the legends of the past these same benefits, they would NOT be the same fighter they were before. This is the evolution of the sport, it happens in EVERY sport. Pele, Maradona, Zico, Garrincha, all these legends of the past, would not fare well today, it is simply naïve to assume boxing is FREE from progressing.

And as I said previously, the quality of the fighters has improved. There is no evidence whatsoever about blank statements on registered boxers anywhere on Earth, even if there were somehow MORE registered boxers in one country at a certain period than in the rest of the world combined at a different period, it says NOTHING about the quality of it. There is also NO evidence to prove that there were more registered boxers or unregistered boxers in the past, NONE, so it is logical to assume my assertion.

 

choklab- If the avg ht is 1 inch or so, and you shrink Wlad an inch and up Louis 1, thats pretty significant. And its not all genetic. Diet, environment, etc determines if we reach our tallest potential height. A older boxer benefits from modern things just as a modern guy would not have those benefits if he went back.

All you have to do is see how Wlad got stretched earlier in his career before he became so much more fit to see the difference lol.

 

Logic. I noted it in my last post.

 

This.

 

Yes, I'm very sure. I also noted it in the post that you seemed to acknowledge the underlying rationality of early, where I said it's why smaller schools usually compete athletically against smaller schools, and larger against larger. Raw numbers translates to a better talent pool. It's not deniable under any real kind of rational ****ysis.

 

And, as far as if fewer people are practicing it 1. that's highly unclear per above 2. per the school ****ogy, there are no more people on the football team for larger schools than smaller school. But the talent is nevertheless generally much higher. There is a huge amount of self selecting that goes into any such process.

 

The world population in 1500 was less than half a million.
That's why Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling paintings look so sh!t to modern eyes.

 

Of course it was great. It is a huge part of our world heritage and culture. But if someone did the exact same thing today no one would care. World culture has changed. It doesn't make it any less important. Louis and Ali are easily the 2 greatest HW's of all time, they were hugely significant in society and boxing in a way no one else has been. But h2h, they can't compete with modern dominant champs. The world has changed.

 

It really isn't. Two sources, which you've acknowledged do not cite the basis for their assertion, say this. It completely defies belief that they could make such a statement, which would require in depth research of numerous countries records, without citing any such work. It smells like bull****. Again, if I have to weight the word of a "golden oldie" vs inherent probabilities that go along with worldwide population growth and market penetration, I'll pick the latter, and any rational, nonbiased person would as well.

 

Great fights make great fighters. Regardless of the total numbers participating world wide it has to be the professional infrastructures that is responsible for developing all time potential.

Professional boxing had a lot more layers of competition that has gone now. Amateur boxing still has novice level, open class, international circuits. Professional Boxing on the whole does not.

Without the layers of competition at each level in pro boxing you could have a hundred million people participating in professional boxing and it would only be a select few of highly financed prospects making it through with manufactured records. The competition is only at one level.

Until profesionals go back to having 10 well matched fights a year (where it is acceptable for decent fighters to lose three of those annual fights) you won't develop the same kind of seasoning throughout the levels that pro boxing once had in its real 1930-1960s peak.

You used to have losers who could win fights that fought more often. There was a level for all boxers to be overall more successful and more competitive. The "opponents" were better. Competition stiffer throughout the ranks.

Without the small clubs a promoter only has to put on one competative fight on the card and use a circuit of traveling part time professional losers against green manufactured local winners for the rest of the bill. That's been going on for a lot of years.

Regardless of numbers participating, Fighters evolve potential under that system and are as good as they need to be for that system.