Why are boxers of the past always the greatest?

A typical Saturday afternoon. Watch and learn.
=
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEsxKUdy0gU[/ame]

 

after many years it is more clear who was great and who was not. Now we know the fab 4 of the 1980s were greater than say Donald Curry or Aaron Pryor, who were good but had shorter careers. At the time people were calling them as great as the fab 4. Time puts things in perspective.

 

Are you trying to imply he wouldnt?

 

But Joe Louis beat the Baer brothers and Carnera, so he'd beat the Klitschkos

 

At most, here are a handful of alltime greats fighting right now and they are getting compared to thousands of alltime greats from the past.

 

:good

 

Maybe hundreds, not thousands.

 

The OP made a sweeping generalisation.

You might suggest that todays fighters have better nutrition but the old time fighters for the most part fought more frequently, the talent pool was deeper and there wasn't the proliferation of titles.

Guys like Jack Dempsey were hard men. Could you imagine Wladimir Klitschko hanging underneath a railway car to get from town to town? They lived through hard times and weren't cosseted like many modern fighters with huge purses and 21st century conveniences. They fought to put food on the table.

All eras produce great fighters, this one in particular producing Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather. Arguably they could quite likely defeat anyone at their prime weight in history.

However, what I suspect the OP is moaning about is the downplaying of the Klitschko's head to head reputation against former champions.

 

To the ts... Ignore all these fanboy replies and here's your answer.

The simple reason is that fighters of the past have completed their career; everything is signed, sealed and delivered. Current fighters have yet to do this, for all we know wlad could go on a ten fight losing streak, or he could finally win the championship when big brother retires.

We just don't know what active fighters are capable of which is why we can't rank them realistically until they retire.

From a h2h point of view i'd say your premise is flawed; most consider louis the greatest heavyweight of all time and plenty came before him.

Most consider roberto duran damn near unbeatable at lightweight and plenty came before him.

H2h is completely subjective and inaccurate for example "who wins between number 1 ranked physically prime wlad klit and semi retired fat sanders" h2h is never accurate.

When comparing greatness it can only be done when the dust has settled.

 

:huhTyson would eat Wlad's ******* alive. All you need to see that is footage of Tyson, which we have, and footage of Wlad, which we have

 

I remember when i just started taking a interest in boxing and was checking out which boxers where on top, lennox lewis was ruling the heavweight division and was ready to face tyson. Ali gave lennox his belt or something and claimed he was now the greatest.
People went crazy saying how he was boring, ko'd by bums, and basically not great enough to stand in ali's shadow. yet now, almost a decade later, the man is considered one of the greatest evers, and most of his flaws are forgotten, people focus on results and strengths of a fighter and his weaknesses or why he was disliked back in the day are forgotten, thats when nostalgia kicks in and they get overrated compared to our modernday fighters.

 

because the boxers of the future arent around yet?

 

It isnt like that with all fighters though, guys like nunn and chavez are underrated.

 

You do get this; but it's not always the case (with the majority)

If you listen to many journalists many will say the likes of Mayweather is arguably the best they've ever seen.

I've heard many journalists who've been following boxing for over 40, 50 years say that they've never seen someone like Pacquiao.

 

As a sport boxing gets easier for every generation. Fewer rounds, less frequent fight schedule etc. Someone like Ray Robinson fought 1403 rounds in his boxing career while Mayweather Jr has so far fought for 299.

I don't know the statistics in all honesty, but imagine the experience Robinson had while he was still in his physical prime. He'd have had the ring craft and experience of BHop in his early 20's!

I think while having nutritionists and strength conditioners won't hinder current boxers, the frequency of their fight schedule means boxers of bygone eras will have been better fighters because they fought tougher fights more frequently.