what is the difference between the past greats and the modern greats

I don't think he is out of it..... but to make it easier for everybody and avoid misunderstandings, why don't you do to all of us a favour????

Could you tell us what are the boxers that you consider "great" from the last two decades? Yes, mention the boxers that you consider great (not bums as you stated before), from 1991 up to this date and then lets compare them to those from the previous two decades, that is from 1971 up to 1990.

Lets see if the theory of having more and better things now + all the extra goodies holds watters, and actually have made (created) better and greater boxers than before....

 

The difference is 8 divisions. to many titles, and too many divisions. The greats back then were truly great. Today joe Schmoe can win a title.

 

The list is good... Don't just name a few, try to mention all of them, the purpose is to list the 'great' ones as you mentioned before and I think that they fit the bill..... but I think that thre are others that you are forgetting.... think about it.....

Regarding Tyson, he belongs to the 80's but you can take him as a boxer of the 90's if you want to....or we can take him for both decades......

There will be other cases like tyson's case...... but dont worry about it...

I will prepare a list of the best from the 70's and 80's and then we will compare.....

 

Lets start with Morales.

How do you think he stacks up against guys like Jeff Fenech, Azumah Nelson, Wilfredo Gomez, Eusebio Pedroza, Salvador Sanchez, Danny Lopez, Vincente Salividar, Davey Moore, Sandy Saddler??

Thats essentially some of the great superbantam-feathers from the 50's to the 90's.

And by that I mean how does he compare technically, physically and ability wise.

 

Thats why these 'what if?' match-ups should only apply to boxers from the same era. The amount of times I've heard someone say 'this fighter would definately win' without considering the aspect of different eras is ridiculous. Generally I think the reason people favour the older boxers is that they didnt have the same intense training and methods of boxing. If they fought today they would have the edge as they would have the stamina and the skill. Personally I think pioneers of the sport should be left well alone, todays mediocre boxers may beat them but at the time they were transcending the sport which is much more important.

 

I gotta say trowell I very much disagree with that.

Compared to a guy like Wilfredo Gomez Ive heard Morales called an "unskilled labourer". A bit of a simplified and harsh statement but when in put into the right context I dont think its entirely unfair. As Gomez was clearly a superior fighter and probably the best fighter I have ever seen at 122.

Erik would hold a marginal, if any, height advantage over most of those guys..I would say he may even give away a little bit to guys like Saddler and Pedroza.
Saldivar was quite a deal shorter but he made this work for him.

How much have you see of those other guys mentioned? Because your fairly vague analysis seems to tell me you havent seen a hell of a lot of them.

To tell you the truth Id probably only pick him over Lopez from that list of guys. And I cant really say for Moore as I have seen next to nothing of him. Ive seen a lot of Morales fights, he just wasnt as good as these guys.

I suggest if your are going to make some of statements you have made in this thread, maybe you should go back and watch a bit more film and research some past fighters. Because I cant really see what you are basing them on.

 

Most people probably would agree that Sanchez and Arguello would beat Morales, ...... would you agree with that???

 

How much have you seen of those fighters? All of them could box and brawl as well, and he doesn't really have a better chin than any of them, and even with his underrated power, most of them were better punchers too. Morales is without question a great fighter, but with the exception of Danny Lopez (who would give him a great fight) and Davey Moore who I know little about, I'd pick all of them to beat him. Gomez, for instance, was better in virtually ever way. Saddler would totally wreck Erik, a horrible fight for Morales imo.

 

Hey, is your opinion and I respect it, but for most people Morales is just a lower technical version of Arguello in all aspects.....

I don't really recall Morales being faster than Arguello or Arguello being faster than Morales... I do recall Arguello being more precise or accurate than Morales, and more devastating with his punches and also with a better timing......

 

Holy Moley!!!

So much wrong with this post I dont know where to begin.

Ill quickly sum up the main points

* Wilfredo Gomez certainly has more then "very little" foot speed. This guy is among the best guys you will see at being able to keep the fight at exactly the distance he wants. He was fluid and quick on his feet, now I really know you havent seen much of him.

*Gomez had excellent head and upper body movement in his prime..Thats why he got away with keeping his hands a bit low. Erik could catch him but the sort of punishment he would be walking through to do it would be quite astonishing.

*Gomez wasnt a "brawler" by trade..though he could do very well in this role. He generally jumped in and out of range, quite often just not taking anything in return for long periods of his fights. Epitomizes a boxer-puncher, much more so then Morales.

*Watch Zarate-Gomez if you want to see how Wilfredo dealt with a puncher with good stand up skills (better then Erik's) who was about the same size as Morales..Zarate held clear height and reach advantages over Gomez but watch this fight and you will see how Wilfredo is able to negate these.

You are really not helping your cause with some of the comments you are coming back with trowel. No disrespect mate but so far you are only showing ingorance towards the kind of fighter Gomez was and it seems to me you have really seen much of him in his prime.

And Im only on the first guy on the list.

 

These are some of the boxers that come to mind that might be considered greats.... and they fought during the 70's and 80's

Ali, Norton, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Spinks (Michael), Foster, Monzon, Hagler, Hearns, Leonard, Napoles, Duran, Chavez, Arguello, Chacon, Olivares, Sanchez, Gomez, Canto, Gonzalez, ....

I will add to this list as they come to mind...