The Theory of "Modern Training Methods" Being Superior

Modern elite fighters should be fighting 50-round fights, throwing 200 punches a round, and fighting at least once a month.

That would show us how far training methods have advanced.
Until then we should remain skeptical.

 

Muscular conditioning and fast twitch enhancement has.

This is all we can prove, and even then, its not arguable for a superior athlete-It just means we can make an athlete better, not that our athletic talent pool on the whole is better. And just because we can make muscles bigger and healthier, and twitches faster, doesn't mean we are suddenly absolved of the drain this puts on gas tanks.

I think its indisputable that modern methods do some things better than the older ones did, but just how useful those things are is easily argued.

 

The CGI version of Joe Spinell is going to be amazing in SNV's Perfect Strangers movie.

This content is protected

 

You've boxed profesionally right? And you've been around top fighters. What are your personal experiences?

 

most of the fighters who are still revered as the "modern" greats trained the same way as the old school.

ray Leonard ran five miles a day in combat boots.
same with marvin hagler.
they punch the bags and spar, do medicine ball and some push ups. lots of running.
joe calzaghe - nowhere near as great as the above, i know - was known for his great workrate in a very recent era. he trained old school. very very basic. he did a lot of running
lots of running cross country

"modern training methods" whatever its is never even really existed as a concept until the 1990s. maybe in soviet union.
remember Holyfield was treated as some sort of freak in the late 1980s for having a "high-tech training program"
a guy like mackie shilstone actually reminds me more of old school trainer (ie. his job is to get the fighter into top condition first and foremost) rather than something totally new. if you actually look at the stuff they do

****, even rocky balboa's trainer mickey had rocky chasing chickens . nowadays they'd call it a "progressive plyo-endurance high intensity interval poultry protocol drill" of course

 

I think Marquez recently added weight while maintaining speed pretty well, his conditioner did a good job with him

 

there seem to be 4 important things here

1. fighting almost monthly : once or twice a year
2. the evolution of biological science
3. length of fights being trained for
4. average opposition to be faced/general style differences between times

1. low numbers of fights allows for the use of fitness peaks. I will not go fully into this but the body can be managed to physical peak only 2 or three times a year. this allows for a higher level of fitness for specific fights but also increases the bodies vulnerability to illness and the effects of overtraining.

2. favours the modern training.

3. training for longer fights will result in a different physical makeup......tbc i need to restart the cntputer

 

Boxing now is poor compared to the footage I've seen from yesteryear, particularly Joe Louis til about 1990.

 

an older fighters body will be attuned for the possibility of many more than 12 rounds. this gives superior stamina but will increase the short term cost of hard exertion.

4. the higher level of grappling type work in older fights will mean generally stronger core and leg muscles. i believe the average result would cost the older fighter power in a significant number of punches during a fight but preserve possible power later into a fight.

conclusion. if we train a talented but raw fighter through to 26yo and pit him against himself from a different era. 1900 vs 2012, 3 fights(with avarage referee and rules), 12 rnds, 17 rnds and 50 rnds. i say modern wins, ko old/modern dec, old, pick your own for the middle fight.
then i get to train another version of the same fighter to defeat the winner with the optimum methods:
fitness, 1930-40 with emphasis on speed
nutrition/lifestyle, 2012

 

i think 1900 to 1980 was the optimum time for good fighters but that is more because of other factors than training. boxing landscape and popularity being high here

 

Bigger...faster...stronger?...probably...tougher?...I think not...

 

If that theory was true we would see today's fighters being faster, stronger than old school fighters.
Fact is they are not. The strongest and fastest guys are still the old timers.

 

The fastest in history are predominantly from the past 35years, the biggest/strongest in history predominantly from the past 20years

 

how do you know the fastest in history are from the past 35 years?

tyson was pretty fast and powerful and strong. in his prime he trained in the old school way. most of the great "modern" fighters seemed to use the same training kind of methods as the old great fighters