The most interesting hypothetical questions about the history of the HW division?

Bolt is a freak. I never thought I'd see anyone run 9.58.

I guess the professionalism and international organization of running competitively is a huge factor in getting a bigger talent pool of sprinters than in the early 20th century.

I dont think there was a single Jamaican athlete in the 1936 Olympics, for example. Bolt may have had a great-great-grandfather who would have left Owens behind in a cloud of dust for all we know.

 

What would have been the history of the HWs had there been no iron curtain in europe for 50 years ?, say the east euros had been able to compete right away from say the 40s or around then., Doubt there would have been any "bum of the month" fights, because there would have been far more guys to fight, instead of waiting for the small number of top men to come around again, and thus ali and louis and others having to make do with fights that were far to easy for them, imagine if the soviet union had been able to have pro boxers then ?

 

The current lot are boring as hell. I dont know what pro boxers from those countries would have been like 40, 50, 60, 70 years ago, but if they would have been anything like the ones we see today the whole history of the heavyweight championship would be one long stinkeroo.

 

Bolt is a freak but it is no stretch to be wary of the 100 meter title/record holders since the early 80's. Everyone of them has either tested positive or later admitted to using substances that were both not legal in the sport and not available in the 1930's. That is just a fact.

And, there were Jamaicans in the Oly's starting in 1948 which is the next Olympics after 36, notably the great Herb McKenley. Their greatness in the sport (sprinting) stems from it being a national obsession, not that there's "something in the water" down there...

 

Boring maybe, but normaly strong as hell and decent technique. Also there was a lot of very poor fighters who got shots at both louis and ali for example. Im sure the east euros would have had some guys much more able and worth fighting.

 

They are boringly effective. And when a challenger comes along who can hurdle this effectiveness fireworks ensue.

 

Comparing todays soviet's to the communist is a bit of a stretch. The communist were dedicated to a way of life from birth. To be honest, it is very surprising, given the position prestige and money earning power that the heavyweight champion brings, that the soviets didnt push to get a world heavyweight champion. Hitler certainly wanted it for political propaganda purposes. Muhammed Ali vs Igor Vysetsky would have been absolutely mind blowingly huge if it was promoted right and Igor was up to it. On par with Schmelling v Louis, or even Jeffries v Johnson.

 

I see it absolutely the opposite, as did the Cubans. The athletes were not allowed to take part of the capitalistic, decadent system. This was an ideological war and to play by the rules of the adversary was in itself a defeat. See Laszlo Papp, Teofilio Stevenson and dozens, if not hundreds of other fighters we will never know...

 

Of course. The drugs are a huge factor. I assume they are all using them, and perhaps some of the record-holders back to the 1960s or earlier too.

I agree. My point being that they was no Jamaican national obssession with sprinting during the days of Jesse Owens, just as an example. The talent pool has swelled worldwide with the professionalism and burgeoning of Olympic participation and its universally acknowledged prestige.

 

There was talk about matching Joe Louis with the Soviet amateur champion Koroliev.

 

Where would Lennox Lewis be considered by most in ATG HW rankings if he was American?

 

You are right, the cubans and the russians saw it as the opposite.

But i still say that it is surprising. The russians communist theory was that they wanted to dominate sport. They wanted to show USA that there way was the best way. This seemed to be a big thing from the soviets as much as the americans (although maybe it was just the media blinding me). But, they wanted to dominate the olympics to show they were better. And other sports also. That is why they had their full on training camps and drug programs.

The Govt stood to make money from every boxer around. They did the same from their Tennis players where the soviet professional tennis players would make about $100 a day, despite earning millions. I think it is surprising that the Russians didnt take after the heavyweight title which was really the most powerful title in sports in the world and also stood to make the most money. I am guessing that since Russia never really had any good boxers they just were not into the sport that much. And it is only now that freedom of choice is allowed and individuals can choose to fight pro that the sport is starting to forge a following their.

Incidentally, Cuba, i think is a bit of a different situation. The soviets prided themself on going head to head with the US and being stronger in everything. Cuba is much smaller and could never compete with the USA head to head. It is only by sticking with the amateur system that they can be world powerhouses, particularly when realistically, there fighters are not really amateur because they can actually get a better way of life by winning amateur medals and championships.

 

What would a John L. Sullivan against Wladimir Klitschko fight look like?

The first against the last. Bring a prime Sullivan forward. Give him 6 months to get ready, with his own people, and some good, modern people around him. Give Klitschko that same 6 months to get ready for Sullivan. 12 rounds. Modern rules. That fight would answer a lot of questions about heavyweight boxing history and boxing history in general!

 

Effect of old fashioned gloves vs modern ones with result to KOs and cuts?

How would modern heavyweights do with old gloves and vice versa?