What makes you think today's shallow talent pool doesn't mean lesser champs

Ok I'll bite. In boxing's golden years it was pretty much only Americans who competed. Oh there was some professional boxing in Europe and other places but not near as much as they have today. Then in the golden years the fighters from the communist countires were not allowed to compete. Since the fall of communism and the post world war 2 recovery of Europe there has been a lot more athletes competing. So basically today you have a much larger pool of fighters and to be in the top guys today you have to be the best out of a much bigger number of fighters than to be thte best in the days of Louis or Marciano or Ali. Same with baseball. Back in the day you had to be the best in America to get in the big leagues, today you have to be one of hte best in the world since the leagues are full of guys from Venezuala, Cuba, Domincan Republic, Japan, etc. Stands to reason they're better today.

Besides that of course today's athletes are bigger, stronger and faster in every sport so why should boxing be the exception?

 

How do you define boxing's golden years though? Sure the talent pool maybe less in america where it is less popular than in the "golden years" but as far as im aware, boxing is a worldwide sports. For countries like Mexico for example, would you say their people are less into boxing now than they were 50 years ago? Even for the HW's, the loss of the US athletes entering boxing is probably made up with the russians going into it. They always did well in the olympics and now their allowed to fight.

 

well we tried anyway.