When did boxers become 'skilled'?

It has less to do with "skills" than it does ruleset. If you take a 2023 boxer and throw him in 1913 he'll have to adjust his style because of the difference in rule set. The same thing applies to the reverse scenario. It also depends on who you choose. For example Gans and Nelson are both from the same era but I feel like Nelson would have to adjust his style more due to his use of tactics that I don't think modern refs would let slide. I believe that instead of focusing on eras we should focus on what the fighter actually achieved and what they look on film. I see too many people giving reasoning in h2h match ups like "People from this era didn't even know how to block" or "Fighters nowadays are too soft." People who use these sort of arguments only do so because they don't feel actually learning about the boxer. Here's my opinion, an all time great from any era will be able to have success in any era if given time to adjust and adapt. Will they be as great as they were in their own era? It depends on who it is.

 

they have always been Skilled...

but the Athletic Stylish Skill that you are refering too, became more the norm in & around the late 1920s and certainly by the 30s.

it also has waned some, circa the 90s, in mental hardness - Skill & Gameness - to put your money where youre mouth is. IF you claim to be the best, then fight the best.

PROVE it!

the Boxing Boards should MAKE the fights and NOT Owners, Managers and Promoters... proper Eliminations.

 

From the 1930's through the 1990's I'd pick any fighter considered "great" to beat any fighter of the last 20yrs at all the weight classes with the exception of heavyweight.
If anything boxing "skills" have regressed the last twenty years .....

 

I don't think that skill is mainstream in modern boxing. There are a few very skilled boxers today but the vast majority, even at the "elite" level, fight like amateurs.

 

I have to wonder what the ratio of amateurs and true pros has been in the best eras. Does everyone's favourite whipping boy James J Corbett fight like a true pro? I think he knows more then the likes of AJ about fighting, I don't think he'd beat him but he understands the "theory" better and even in the little we've seen and can read he demonstrates more knowledge if you ask me. His play sparring footage with Tunney is interesting and so are Gene's comments about his skill.

"He was brilliant. He still had bewildering speed. He mixed up his punches better then practially any fighter I've ever seen. Imagine, fifty-nine years old! It was the greatest demonstration I've ever seen in the ring. I learned plenty."- Gene Tunney

"He was smarter than Benny Leonard"- Gene Tunney

“He told me he used to draw diagrams of defensive boxing problems, charting the position of feet and the movements of footwork. He'd diagram his position in a corner of the ring, and his opponent's position, and sketch the way he would feint and side-step, eluding a rush. It was something like a dancer charting foot positions of a new dance--always a defensive dance with Gentleman Jim.”-Gene Tunney

This content is protected

 

We'd need more film to say anything of his was subpar especially with in my opinion such words as this from Gene Tunney who is often cited as second to Louis as a text book boxer. "He mixed up his punches better then practically any fighter I have ever seen"

 

He learned the hard way Corbett. Just reading his bio it sounds to me just recalling like a lot of brutal unfair sparring mismatches created him, a bit of a baptism in fire. I feel as though watching him would look off to us but whatever he learnt let him survive being turned into a veggie and earn the title of elusive, dominant and scientific.

 

Gene Tunney is probably the oldest boxer I can think of, that actually looks like a modern fighter and would easily fit into modern era IMO.

 

So we've had no truly great fighters, since the start of this century - is that what you're saying?

 

In My opinion...... No. Most of the fighters considered great the last 20 yrs or so actually began their careers in the 90's......
Fighters like Crawford, Spence, etc ,that began their careers after the turn of the century, look great. But against opponents that probably wouldn't have been top ten contenders in earlier era's.

 

Probably around the 30s.

No, they'd get beat. Although a small percentage might score some wins over low ranked pros.

They'd look like jokes, even amateurs would beat them.