The HW division: What has changed?

But surely it is fairer to compare 2011 to a single year, if we look at assessing the top boxers of 2011 its unfair to compare them to all the heavyweights in an entire decade. Its doing this that makes the current heavyweight scene always look weak. Until you compare the current heavyweight scene on a level playing field you'll never do the current scene justice.


I didnt say those boxers are greats, just if the boxed in different eras they would be great heavyweights, or at least very good. But now its very hard for them to be competitive with people 6 inches taller and 40lbs heavier, but they are in fact bigger than Frazier.

 

That's what I said, Adamek is obviously better. You've said I know nothing about true boxing and then agreed with what I said!

I posted those vids because I agreed with your previous post, and used the videos to back it up!

 

He did some what undermine his credibility in his abilty to contrast the past and the present objectively when he claimed Jesse Owen is faster than Usain Bolt

 

lol, I said if Usain Bolt ran under the same conditions it 10.2 would not seem like such a bad time. Or lets say we have a race you can drive a porsche and I will drive a jeep . . . its an off road race who wins? Owens had to deal, not only with the conditions on the field but those off of it as well.

I disagree with you that if we compare eras that the current era will always look worse. If we look at the current era of the SMW Division it is far superior than any point since inception. you can do this by year, decade or dominate champ.

 

Sorry, did I interupt your love in . . . yes, he has made some valid points all of which i have addressed. I guess that goes to say that you have not made any good points on this thread you started . . . lol!

 

Its funny you used Adamek as an example because he currently is my favourite heavyweight and shows the best potential out of the lot. Mac Foster was the Micheal Grant of his era . . .lol. I would not put him in the top 5 of the 70s let alone the top 5 . Quarry was ok.

but the point of the 70s like every other era up today (as I mentioned before) you had greats leaving and up and commers coming up through the system . . . today there is nobody old outside of holyfield who should have quit a decade ago and no one coming up and a decent top five.

 

i meant the current era always looks weak when you compare just the current scene with a whole decade like you do,
to use your super middleweight example. the 90s had;
roy jones
thomas hearns
James Toney
chris eubank
nigel benn
steve collins
Joe calzaghe
frankie liles
byron mitchell
sven ottke
robin reid

compared to 2011;
Bute
froch
kessler
dirrell
pavlik
stieglitz
Johnson


If you scrutinise the super middleweight division the same way you examine the heavyweight division it doesnt look as good as the 90s. But of course that is not a good way of looking at it, as we are all aware it is a very strong division.
It is stronger than most of the 90s, when we compare the years individually, (except perhaps 1994).

 

this is my thought on the subject too. they make more money and dont have get punched

 

This is where I dont completely agree with you,
I think the USA is still producing boxers the same as before, however, I think this is why they have less success now, they still produce skillful 180-220lb boxers, which is what has been necessary to dominate the division in the past. However the great hws now aren't 5'10-6'2" and 220lbs, they are 6'5"+. America has only really produced one great boxer like this in riddick bowe, so where are all the athletic 6'6" americans. They're not going into the boxing gyms when they are 10 years old. They are playing basketball or american football.

 

Finally something we can agree upon! I made a point earlier that in every other sport in the US atheletes have gotten, bigger, stronger, faster, EXCEPT in boxing. I did not give a reason why . . . one theory is the ability to make huge money in other areas like basketball and football. the point is that the biggest men are not in the ring. as the sport has evovled the US has declined or remained stagenate at best. there is tons of emprical evidence that has shown that the number of gyms have closed across te country and more kids are hanging out on the basketball court as oppossed to gym.

What you see as normal state of US boxing (190-210) I see as regression because the best are not going into the sport. I still refute your point that the current crop is as good as those in the past. i watched the videos you posted and the amount of punches thrown where roughly the same. Some might argue that the 70's match was more of a chess match and had very little wasted movement. As I said before foster and Quarry are not in my top 5 for the decade

 

I see what you are saying and that is not what i meant. This last decade is better than any other era . . . I am not talking just this year and the same for heavyweights. I am comparing apples to apples. that is the decades as a whole

you can add pascal, diaconu, jones, andrade, Bika, Calzaghe, Viet to this era. plus there are a lot of hot prospects in the division as well. As I said before I consider a great divison one with greats vets are around or just left, solid top 10 and great up and coming prospects. I do not look at just the top 5 or 10.