Why are boxers of the past always the greatest?

They hate anything new with a passion. Enjoy the graveyard.

 

They have something you don't have - Perspective.

 

Nostalgia is a factor for sho as everyones sayin. Skillwise obviously all sports have improved since yesteryear but people in sports simply do not strive for greatness as much as they used to. You got rarities now, but for real it seems fighters wanted greatness more back in the day. It's like too much money is at stake now or somethin for cats to try and be great.

 

6 titles in 5 weight classes

 

I have perspective and unless they attended hundreds of matches live they have seen the exact same big fights that I have. Basically whatever is available.

Just look at them whining about the Hopkins win. The forum is dead but they still manage to complain when they do participate.

Oh how I miss the days of the mob running boxing and not seeing the majority of fights because of the lack of technology. Truly a Golden Age.

 

Like former Ring Magazine Editor and New York State Athletic Comissioner Randy Gordon? Or referee and Rubin Carter sparring Partner Ronny Lipton?

I think they do have a deeper perspective - yes.

 

Lipton begging for a job is awesome stuff. I'm talking about them commenting on the current era. They don't give a dam, they rather collect some mint conditioned copy of a fight from 40 years ago then watch this generation.

 

Here are the boxrec statistics if anyone cares:

The person contacted who ever runs boxrec and this is the info that was given back. 2009 was not completed.

 

:good same thing I was thinking

 

OK - 40 years ago - You'd rather see the HW division of today or
Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Earnie Shavers, Ron Lyle, George Chuvallo, Ken Norton fighting?

 

RSBonos - Is that the number of registered pro's by year?

 

Boner oops I mean Broner, would be a H2H nightmare for anybody in history

 

Pro fights per year according to boxrec.

 

Dig up some statistics on registered fighters for the same period.

 

I didn't do the research but i'm sure that you can contact people at boxrec.

If you're just trying to make the obvious point...

So they fought a lot more in pre 50's boxing. Do we get to dismiss post 1960's boxing? By that point the stats should be accurate.