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

Some of those guys from the past were just freakish and could do well in any era. You look at what sports were popular in the past and I'll show you some first class athletes. William Marshal was a victor of 500 tourneys. Mensen Ernst was an early 19th century ultra marathon runner who would run across continents and average 120 miles a day for months in some cases. Gaius Appuleius Diocles made the equivalent of billions of dollars in the Roman chariot races. Young Tom Morris won 4 consecutive golf championships more than a century before Tiger Woods was born. Fred Archer and Isaac Burns Murphy won thousands of horse races. These guys were damn good at what they did.

 

Na real men use pegs. Put some pegs on that s.o.b. see how far he gets nothing olympic about him. He should have dildos for legs that son of a *****.

 

:good

 

I'll keep it simple - most of the advances we see in other sports come from advances in the technology around the sport. Different surfaces, different materials in the equipment, different footwear/suits. Boxing has always been a minimalist sport, ergo they don't benefit from the same technological advances other sports did.

The non-technological advances in other sports came from advances in training methods. But for boxers, many of the advances never made it to boxing. People like Conte, Herrera, and Ariza are trying to bring more modern training methods, but many boxers are on record saying they felt better using more traditional training. Khan, Rios, Cotto, etc. have all attested to this.

As a result, boxing never went through the same degree of evolution after around the early 70s. And I would argue with lower participation today, it also attracts a lower class of athlete than back when it was a marquee sport. I think we have seen a little bit of regression this generation.

 

here is how it is was and always will be.

every single decade, (never mind centuries) athletes in EVERY SINGLE sport get better and better.

this is a fact and is as a WHOLE, not a fighter by fighter basis. of course in every sport the very best of the best would be amongst the best in any era. this means the athletes as a WHOLE are way better today than ever before, in 20 years the same will be said and will be correct.

the middle teir athletes today are many many x better than yesteryear, get a CLUE guys, this does NOT mean the very best of the 40's 50's couldn't compete at the top today, it means the journeymen and gatekeepers back then couldn't be that today.

 

how can you claim that it always has, and it always will be? The data you have access to is limited to 2 centuries at best.

the very science that you are trying to brandish your argument with rules that it NEVER will be a definite. ...besides which the arrogance of pretending that your tiny amount of data applies to every era and epoch that has passed on earth and has yet to pass.... that's not what scientific data is about at all.

scientific data actually directly DOESNT deal with universal facts, merely an approximation to the truth as yet calculated. Science does not share your arrogance, and its data would have been flawed and positively medieval if it had.

 

Again, you seem to be insinuating there will be some sort of evolutionary advancements in the space of 100s years. That's not how it works kiddo.

 

I find it ironic that this whole "better athlete = better boxer" thread is active on the same day that Bernard Hopkins, a fighter DECADES past his athletic peak, is about to defend and attempt to unify his titles against an opponent who could probably beat him in any and every athletic metric measurable. Just as he has done against most opponents he's faced over the past 15 years. People are arguing over sprinters finishing a 100 meter dash 50 milliseconds faster in 75 years when they see before their eyes a guy of significantly diminished physical abilities still competing at the highest levels on pure skill.

THIS is the difference between boxing and other sports.

 

Bolt's personal record is half a second better than Hayes on 100m. that 8.5 leg is a rumour and haye could not ever run a flying start 100m that fast if measured accurately.

 

Come on dumbo, really? Athletes in every sport have gotten bigger, stronger, faster….but not in boxing, because in boxing there are WEIGHT CLASSES!!

You can't get bigger, and you cannot tell me that WW's for instance are so much stronger than 50yrs ago - there is only so much strength you can get out of 147lbs. The training hasn't changed in 100yrs for a reason….you can't incorporate hard weight lifting into a sport governed by weight classes.

Fighters 40yrs ago would whoop ass because their were many many many more knowledgeable trainers and many more men participating in the sport, therefore the competition was much greater!

 

Excellent post. :good

 

Tyson's argument best applies to the heavyweight division where there is no weight limit. Modern heavyweights like Wlad make big heavyweights of yesteryear like Ali and Foreman look almost tiny. Wlad hovers around 250lbs of toned muscle and towers over both those two by 3 or 4 inches in height. Prime Ali was a comparatively diminutive 215lb. with little punching power. Wlad would toy with the much smaller man and hurt him with every punch. Foreman himself on his twitter feed twice admitted he would lose to both Klitschko's due to their much better, more modern technical boxing and their sheer size advantage. Tyson was just being honest which is kind of refreshing.

 

that's alright mama.

 

To Stallion, who wrote this
((There is a huge difference. Today countless sprinters routinely run under that time without putting the full effort, not even to mention counting all the athletes that run better than Owens since 1936. In a present day, he wouldn't even come anywhere close to being the best with that time (actually wouldn't even enter the top 100 times of 2014).))

Inform yourself a little before making such uneducated remarks.

http://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger

 

advance in other sports = money..BIG MONEY. here(USA) we have 6'2+ 17year olds walking around at 110kg,105kg of muscle..they under go scans at young ages to predict future injuries..mechanics of the game have changed..they get feed and housed..its crazy the amount of money..boxing you'd be crazy to pick boxing over another sport. athletes have gotten better 100% but you're born to fight.boxing gyms are closing,the money isn't better(minus about 7 fighters),technique is still the same,fighters are born not made