Why are boxers of the past always the greatest?

Thank you.

If you take that line of thinking then everyone after the 1950's were overrated bums.

 

I think credit is more earned after you retire.

 

More fights, more rounds, more adversity; and more leeway to actually prove their resumes and toughness.. Hard to compile a resume of tons of lineal titles and ranked contenders if matchmaking is so damn hard and you're only fighting a couple times a year at the highest level. It's hard to become a complete fighter if you're not actually fighting a lot, right? A sword gets rusty if you don't sharpen it and martial artists are the same. Plus I feel that a lot of the best champions and boxers never end up wanting to pass on any of their knowledge to the next generation either. TV killing local fight venues definitely hurt the growth of fighters.

Today's dudes are stronger and faster due to sports science advancements(that includes PEDS) but the experience and resumes arent there.

 

Check out these rankings for HW's from late 60's and 1970's. It's obvious that historians at that time didn't think much of the 'golden age of heavyweights'

Nat Fleischer, Founder of Ring Magazine, 1958, 1971.

Jack Johnson

Jim Jeffries

Bob Fitzsimmons

Jack Dempsey

Jim Corbett

Joe Louis

Sam Langford

Gene Tunney

Max Schemling

Rocky Marciano




Charley Rose, 1968

Sam Langford

Jack Johnson

Jack Dempsey

Joe Louis

Jim Jeffries

Gene Tunney

Sam McVey

Rocky Marciano

Jim Corbett

Max Baer




World Boxing 1974 Readers Poll

Joe Louis

Jack Dempsey

Rocky Marciano

Jack Johnson

Muhammad Ali

Joe Frazier

Gene Tunney

Jim Jeffries

Sonny Liston

Ezzard Charles




Nat Loubet, 1975

Joe Louis

Jack Dempsey

Jim Jeffries

Jack Johnson

Rocky Marciano

Gene Tunney

Bob Fitzsimmons

James J. Corbett

Muhammad Ali

Joe Frazier




John Durant -Author of "The Heavyweight Champions" (1976)

Joe Louis

Jack Johnson

Jack Dempsey

Muhammad Ali

Gene Tunney

Joe Frazier

Jim Jeffries

James J. Corbett

Rocky Marciano

Max Schemling




Bill Brennan 1978 (Former President of the WBA)

Muhammad Ali

Joe Louis

Jack Dempsey

Jack Johnson

Gene Tunney

Jim Jeffries

Max Schemeling

Rocky Marciano

James J. Corebett

Bob Fitzsimmons




Big Book of Boxing Reader Poll, 1978

Joe Louis

Muhammad Ali

Rocky Marciano

Jack Dempsey

Jack Johnson

Gene Tunney

Joe Frazier

Jim Jeffries

Ezzard Charles

Sonny Liston

 

This is a pretty solid statement.

 

i can se an old vitali beating old foreman and a prime vitali beating prime foreman
​

 

The oldies paid their dues. Believe me, if fighters today werent paid so lucrative, theyd fight more often. Elite fighter Im referring too. You guys really think todays fighters are that much stronger watch an episode of Last Man Standing. These huge, modern day athlete gym rats take on ancient tribesmen and get their asses handed to them in every dept. Stamina, speed, even strength alot of times. Like saying Lawrence Taylor or Barry Sanders would suck in todays NFL you know that aint true.

 

^
I couldn't find the original article by Ring founder

This content is protected

, but someone already wrote about it.

 

Right now is quite a short space of time.

The legitimately judgeable past in boxing is around 70 years give or take.

There are far more fighters from the past so it's going to provide a larger amount of dominant boxers, isn't it. It's just like someone hearing the top ten singles this week and saying "music was better in the 60s"

 

its called nostalgia

 

Right, and I can see even David Haye doing ok in the 70s.
No, he probably wouldn't beat Foreman, but I see him beating a lot of the top ten fighters of that era..