The credit for this question goes to Lufcrazy. I saw it in another thread and there were no responses, but it sparked my interest "I've always wandered what's more beneficial for a fighter: a dedicated sparring and training program over a course of weeks with a rest period after the fight, or continual fights very quickly after each other at a high level. Say the Greb approach v the Floyd approach. what's better for technical development?" So what is everyone's take on this?
First of all its not weeks of consistent training..Its Months of intense training,lots of runnin, sparring, bag work, a strict diet and plenty of shadow boxing. And they do not get a break or rest before a fight, they just usually break down to sparring and the mitts right before the fight..So the whole Floyd VS Grebb's approach its just a different time, those guys always trained and fought all the time. The Golden age of boxing had the largest school of talent in the history of the sport...Its not like today with million dollar promotions and endorsements worth millions..Guys like Grebb, Braddock, Langford. these guys were fighting for the lives literally to feed there families and just survive. These guys are the true bad asses in a time where Boxing was 10 times more brutal than it is today..I would say 90% of the welterweights from the 30's and 40's would beat the **** and snot outa Floyd Mayweather.
