''We don't want to admit it, but athletes gets better'' ...& Mike Tyson Mysteries

The fighters of yester-year never gassed out. Ever. And they fought at a higher pace for 15 rounders.

Boxing isn't athletics.

Todays top boxers have nicknames such as Gas-nelo and Grabimir Clinchko because he needs a rest every 10 seconds.
A guy taking on the p4p ,#1 best in the world was only good for 6 rounds.

Look at the Brawl in Montreal. Thrilla In Manila. FOTC. Fighters wont ever be able to do that again.

 

Good grief.

Dempsey would rip new orifices in David 'my-little-toe-hurts' Haye, in places he wouldn't have thought possible.

Get some perspective, man!

 

Really? This guy??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJkiwu_04dw

 

No, guys like you give them silly internet forum nicknames.

They dont actually have those nicknames.

Also, hopw often did Ali clinch in his fights?

 

No - this guy...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENiJs6_2P2A

 

Yup, I still see a guy who has the skills of a toughman competitor.

Look at that fight with Willard, swinging away with arm punches,off balance, with his hands down.

I particularly like hown he sets up his KO with a nut punch at 2.40

 

The point of me posting another link was to illustrate how easy it is to dig up snapshots to mask what is essentially a glib comment.

Regardless of the footage that either of us could post, it does not change the fact that Boxing Historians still rate Dempsey as a top-ten ATG Heavyweight, with speed, power and underrated boxing ability. It does not change the fact that Dempsey, quite literally, wrote the book on Boxing. His works are still read and inspire today.

So, by all means, please continue to pick holes in, Dempsey's style and technique. It adds no weight to what was a thoughtless response from you in the first place.

 

The answer to whether athletes today are better than athletes of the past is a lot more complicated than a simple yes or no, especially when talking about a sport as multi-faceted as boxing.

 

Hes rated top 10 because of what he did in HIS era.

You cant com-pare guys from different eras that far apart.

Id considered Jessie Owens as arguably the greatest sprinter of all time,even though his times wouldnt compete today.

Jim Brown was one of the greatest running bacjks of all time,l yet he would never get those yards in a modern NFL game.

George Best os one of the greatest soccer players of all time, even though his drinking the night before, smoking at half time routine would see him collapse half way through a modern premier league game.

Dempsey is one of the ATG's, but that doesnt mkean he could compete against modern elite boxers his size.

Same goes for John l Sullivan

 

I disagree. And, in the spirit of the thread's subject matter, I would argue that Dempsey's ferocity and toughness, combined with his misunderstood skill-level would be more than enough to compete with a generation gone soft.

 

You're entitled to your opinion.

 

Precisely.
Talking sbout advances in sports science being the be all and end all is way too simplistic. Complex issues like boxing ability can't be simplistically distiller down to one single factor.

Not everything from the present is automatically superior to the past.

You mean to tell me that if Gene Kelly was around today he wouldn't rate as a tap-dancer?
Or that if Elvis was singing today he wouldn't even get in the top 100?

Of course not!

 

Kovalev vs. Hopkins tomorrow night and then just 48 hours until a new episode of MIKE TYSON MYSTERIES!!! :happy

 

Meh, Bob Hayes was as fast or faster than Usain Bolt and he was 5'11" from the 60's. Ran a 8.5 on the last leg of a 4x100 relay. Technology my ass.

 

Yeah but how fast were the cripples back then? :bart Could any of them hang with Oscar "The Golden Boy" De La Pistorius?