Why are we so biased/obsessed with old fighters/era's

your old school mentality, that boxing has not evolved, that styles make fights. It is that mentality that is preventing american boxing from developing. In eastern europe nobody cares about sugar ray leonard or larry holmes.

 

I can show you the debates that we had earlier on in the year where you trashed Wilder. And you also said that AJ was rubbish and overhyped too.

Wilder has got bad technique for the level that he’s fighting at. We have seen him defend a world title with horrible technique where he has been unbalanced etc. That is a proven fact.

Regarding your other points, I never mentioned anything about fighters from 60 years ago. But yes, there were very technical fighters back then.

You are very ignorant of the past. You seem to think that because you didn’t see, that it didn’t happen.

 

I think you are mistaken, i always defend wilder. He and fury together set the new level for modern day hw fighting.

i like a lot of old fighters as larry holmes, i just disagree with the idea that he would have any business in todays hw era.
I never said that there were no technical fighters 60s years ago, i only said that nobody back then did techniques that usyk and loma do, because you said that there have no new techniques been developed.

 

One more time for you:

Boxing HAS evolved. But it does NOT keep EVOLVING EVERY DECADE like some other sports have.

You are claiming that because of what’s happened in athletics over the past 30 years, that there’s a good chance that the fighters in 30 years time will be better on average than what they are today.

Yet that line of thinking is completely ignorant.

Pitting your skills in a boxing ring against another man, with many variables, is not the same as swimming or sprinting from point A to point B.

A more powerful athlete = a faster time recorded in many sports.

A faster time = better.

Yet a stronger, more powerful athlete in boxing is only one of many other factors to consider.

There has been no overall progression in the sport over the past 30 years.

There’s a number of whole divisions today that aren’t as strong as what they were 30 years ago.

Regarding mentality, I’m still baffled as to what exactly you’re referring to.

I am saying that the fastest, youngest, tallest, heaviest and/or strongest guy doesn’t always have an advantage or win.

It depends on how they match up stylistically.

That is always the case.

I literally don’t know what you are arguing about. Saying that ‘styles make fights’ is the most unbiased and un ignorant thing that any fan could ever say.

You’re going to have to explain in detail what exactly you have a problem with.

If 2 MW’s fight for a title, the biggest one might not necessarily win.

If we had a time machine and Sergey Kovalev fought Archie Moore at LHW, Kovalev couldn’t be favoured just on the basis that he’s from the modern era.

 

In Eastern Europe nobody cares about Ray Leonard or Larry Holmes?

Okay.

It was a long time ago since they were active. But any knowledgeable boxing fan should want to learn the history of the sport.

Name me all of the Eastern European HW’s of the past who were better than Larry Holmes.

Name me all of the Eastern European HW’s of TODAY who are better than Larry Holmes.

Name me all of the Eastern European WW’s both past and present who were better than Ray Leonard?

Your statement isn’t impressive.

It’s just ignorant.

 

ray leonard would loose to the average olympic ww boxer today. I know that i am a heretic for you for saying that, but since those old guys are simply jesus to you, i think there is no possibility to convince you.
i dont hold such high believes for todays fighters. You of course will say that I do, because from your perspective a guy like ali or leonard is jesus. Your live in a super small nostalgic bubble were you can not even understand the perspective of somebody else or at least for one second doubt what you are saying.

 

i said already that basketball and soccer also have a lot of variable and statistics show that they run more and score more precisely. There is also a book about ali where all the punch stats of his fights were shown. Turns out he was far from guys like canelo or mayweather or klitschko in terms of hit/make-miss ratio.
But you will call that book fake news anyway so.

 

I’m not mistaken.

I remember you very well.

How would Larry Holmes NOT have had any business in today’s era?

Ha!

List today’s top 10 HW’s.

Fury is a great fighter, who has the skills, size and speed to have been successful in any era.

Wilder is extremely dangerous but also heavily flawed. We’ve seen him struggle with lower level guys. And if he can’t land his power, he comes unstuck. He’s very vulnerable.

AJ is also very vulnerable.

Apart from Usyk, (who is still unproven at HW) after the top 3, most of the other guys are nothing great.

Larry Holmes would have beaten the majority of today’s top 10 guys.

He beat Ray Mercer when he was in his 40’s.

Below are the top 10 HW’s from almost 30 years ago.

You can try and explain to me where there’s been any progression:

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiX082R9-btAhVIXsAKHVtHB74QFjAAegQIBhAC&url=https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_1991&usg=AOvVaw0oFkyc_gBY8doK0rMeaj0u

Regarding techniques, you’re talking about different styles based on a fighter’s attributes.

What I was referring to, is that there’s been no new punches etc invented.

A fighter today is faced with the same as what a fighter from yesteryear was faced with. In fact, the fighters from yesteryear had it harder. They had same day weigh-ins, more fights, longer fights and with stronger competition etc.

 

What’s the point in continuing if you’re going to be stupid?

I remember you very well now.

You made these same stupid comments earlier in the year. And when you were embarrassed and ridiculed, you ended up saying that you were just trolling for some fun. Then you came back and said that you were serious. Then you were trolling again. You couldn’t make your mind up. And now you’re back doing the same thing.

 

I was happy to debate all of your points until you started being stupid.

 

So, western snob.
Vitaly and Wladimir Kltischko.
Povetkin.
CW: a lot and plenty of guys. Starting with Huck.

Boxing that Usyk is doing is damn damn close to..........British boxe. Snobbish and rural tribal attitude does prevent to see this ONE.

 

I recognized you the minute I read your name, and I made fun of you and you thought I was crazy.

yeah just ignore points that dont fit your narrative. Just keep living in your small little world.

 

I dont think that you will understand, but those are just names. You are saying that guys like ray mercer or evander holyfield are good because they are ray mercer and evander holyfield they are legends or atgs, which is a little term you fan boys just make up, there is no strict criteria what an atg actually is.You see mire the fame then the actual boxing it self in a fighter

 

I’m no snob.

Read my posts.

I asked for all of the Eastern European HW’s who were better than Larry Holmes.

All you could name is THREE.

THREE!

And most people wouldn’t rate Povetkin higher.

No. Marko Huck was not a better fighter than Larry Holmes.

Now you can go ahead and name me all of the Eastern European level WW’s who were better than Leonard.

I’ll wait.

 

You talk ignorant garbage until you’re pulled apart.

Then it’s:

“I was only joking buddy”

It’s just your little defence mechanism for when you get exposed.

Now tell me how I can have an intelligent and objective debate with someone who says that Ray Leonard couldn’t have beaten an average Olympic WW of today?

You just killed the debate with that unfunny BS.