Who wins? John L Sullivan or Wladimir Klitschko?!!!

Name one sport, where an objective comparison is available, that has "peaked"?

In every single well defined discipline athletes are faster, stronger and mentally better prepared. From marathon to mountaneering to weight lifting to even golf - I have not heard of an exception.

This argument is only beeing made in sports where there is no objective criteria to compare performance - and thus it leaves plenty of room for speculation. But there is no reason to believe - if you believe in scientific method - that the lack of an objective metric will somehow render the practioneers of the said discipline to be somehow immune from the overall tendencies.

 

Seeing as how Sullivan passed away many years ago, I'd have to pick Wlad.

 

The whole point is that there were very few "world" class fighters then much like the ufc today and they met each other a lot thats were their lore comes from today boxing on the world stage is a much bigger sport and more talent world wide is trown in the pool instead of being mostly poor americans. Most americans complain that there are no good fighters anymore but they are wrong there are more good fighters today but as money is huge to many wants a piece of the pie making to many classes and even more titles to make cash out of if you start looking at the fighters out there today and put them in the original weight classes there is a HUGE talent pool. The biggest guys have maybe gone back technique wise but they have increased size strenght and tactics to make up for loss of speed and skill the big fighters today wouyld embarress the smaller heavyweights of yesteryear with their size and strenght. To bad the sport is nowhere near as popular as football (soccer for americans) nothing realy compares in world wide talent just need asia and africa catching up in tactical awareness to have a non south american or european world cup winner.

 

Bzzt. Where is the "objective" comparison in here? Points scored per game? Hardly directly comparable.

Overall basketball today is faster, much more complicated and more athletic. Modern teams will whoop Chamberlain's era teams like little boys.

I am still waiting for a fact, that would support this assertion. Repeating a point does not prove it.

 

William Harrison Dempsey was born June 24, 1895, in Manassa, Colo., to parents accustomed to living in poverty. The ninth of 11 children, he was called Harry during his boyhood. Growing up, the family moved to another part of Colorado and then to Utah. After Harry graduated from the eighth grade, he struck out on his own.
Legend has it that Dempsey became a hobo, but he actually was an itinerant laborer who rode the freights and camped by the wayside on his way to temporary work. Digging ditches, picking peaches, cutting timber and being a circus roustabout were among his jobs. Whenever he could, he fought in local clubs in Colorado, Utah and Nevada, using the name "Kid Blackie" or "Young Dempsey."

 

Hello! Anybody home? Are you capable of comprehending what I did say?

It was my point that this is not an objective comparison in your example. My other point was that anywhere such a comparison exists.. yada yada - read it again a few posts back.

And the third argument was that for disciplines where no comparison exists there is no reason to believe... yada yada - read it again.

 

Try to read what I have said. You will feel less of an idiot making arguments against points that nobody made.

 

Pea, I normally like your posts, but I believe you are way, way off-base here. Your Wilt example is case in point, because in no way was he as talented a natural athlete as Shaquille O'Neal.

Have you watched Wilt move laterally? He's not gifted at all. Even players during his day commented as much. He was a dominant force because of his size and strength (pre-weight training), but in terms of speed and leap, today he would be nothing special.

I think he works against your point, rather than assists it.

And if there's been an overall decline in boxing since the middle part of last century, it's because the talent pool has shrunk. Kids now don't dream of becoming HW champ. They play BB, FB, even baseball, rather than box. The lack of boxing programs in high schools makes the the sport inferior to the others and always will (at least in America), as long as that's the case.

 

Wladimir Klitschko

 

Too big, too strong, too skilled & hits too ****in' hard.

Wladimir Klitschko by early KO.

 

Agree with curmudgeon above - and curmudgeon fans like "Sweet" Pea will never let facts get in the way of how they feel.

Not only does Sullivan not belong in the same century as Wlad, he does not belong in the same ring.

Prediction: Wlad Murder 1.

 

There is no difference Pea. I have trained martial arts, basic mma, boxing and muai thai, and the most effective way to throw a punch is with boxing technique. Bare knuckle simply means that when Wlad hits him there would be a very real chance of him KILLING sullivan no BS. Someone wlads size and skill, hitting a guy who is standing flat footed full force with bare knuckle would do some very serious damage. Totally different worlds. As for your comments on conditioning, you can't compare the two. The pace of the fight would be 1000% different. Todays guys fight at a very fast pace. The guys from that era would have taken their time, and to be honest lacked the skills to effectively push the pace of the fight without getting cleaned up. They had long term endurance, but could definitely not match the intensity that todays fighters can achieve.

 

I think that you are severely under rating sports science. If sports have peaked then why are world records continually broken. Because of better technique, better nutrition and more advanced training thats why. Your example of a mile in one second is as extreme as you could possibly go. The improvements will always be gradual. Boxing is evolving still, it is just a very slow process. It is just very difficult to compare how fighters from different eras would actually compete with each other. I am one of the few who believe that Lennox Lewis could beat someone like Ali, based on size, style and reach. How could Ali out box someone who is taller, stronger, punches harder and has a longer reach. IMO he couldn't. I know a lot of the classic forum people will probably jump on here and bag me for this, but if any of you have actually sparred bigger guys before ( I have on different occasions) you would know just what a big difference it makes.

 

I agree there is a difference in the way that you take the fight itself. For instance you wouldn't cover up for long periods of time. However you were talking about the way you punched, which is esentially the same. Also the hands are still held correctly in boxing form, except with bare knuckle they should always be kept high, as one good hit can often times mean a KO. I don't agree that the hands are held further apart. Modern Boxers naturally parry in the ring, and hold their hands far enough apart to see punches coming (there are exceptions like Tyson though). Parrying is a big part of modern boxing already. If they held their hands further apart they would be leaving themselves wide open. As you follow MMA, you would know that almost all top MMA guys get seperate boxing coaching, as it is UNIVERSALLY recognised as the best way to throw and defend agaisnt punches in the stand up. The main difference is the range, as MMA fighters need to stand further apart to defend against both takedown and kicks.