Why does this forum think old time heavies sucked?

Joe Louis was, how do I say this, “old school good.” But he wasn’t “good good.”
Like when he actually landed a punch on heavyweights who didn’t know how to defend themselves, sure he hit them hard.
But a guy like Tubbs would zip zap his away around the ring, use legitimate defense, and sharp punching to destroy Louis’s entire era.

for instance when Tubbs let’s go of his piston like jab, he actually breaths out with the punch. Kinda like a “fss!” Did Joe Louis do that? Probably not, no way.

does that make sense?

 

There is no such thing as luck in boxing. Especially in that fight. You train and you have a skill set. Moorer chin and discipline failed him not luck

 

The best thing about the whole "modern is better" argument is that it's never used from a sports science background. It's used for a justifying status background.

People have favorites who got them into boxing. Today that seems to be: Mayweather, Pacquiao, Golovkin, Canelo. They hear about greats from decades ago who fought everyone and looked good doing it, so they say the sport has progressed, therefore their fighters are better.

The irony is on a couple of decades time they will be the same people arguing with the newer generation of boxing "I don't care what you say about progression Mayweather/Pacquiao/Canelo/Golovkin would beat *insert name* from pillar to post.

Saying 180 pound greats couldn't compete as a HW today is probably correct, no 180 pound fighter is going to campaign in a division filled with 240 pound fighters. So either they bulk up or they compete at LHW or CW. But that's different to saying Shannon Briggsknocks out Marciano. No one really believes if Briggs was a contender in the 50s,he wrestles the crown from Marcianos grasp.

 

The Suga Man is the only one who could compete and beat the fighters of the past few decades

 

Joe Gans would beat any LHW today.

 

Only a complete idiot would say that Foreman won by a lucky punch

 

Try having a conversation with a casual in real life and this is all too obvious. They’ll either do this or tell you Ali was the best ever.

Trying to offer rebuttals are often useless, because rather than shut up and listen, or do some learning and research for them self, their brain goes into defensive mode and they just blabber

 

Requires special & talented boxer sub 200pound to win againts jimmy young, mike weaver, cooney, witherspoon, shavers, lyle, quarry.

I dont think schmeling & sharkey can do that..

I prefer tunney who can surprised us..

 

Schmeling would definitely beat Young, Quarry and Shavers.
I'd also bet on Sharkey over Conney and Lyle.

 

There certainly were HWs over 210 even during Jeffries days. Dempsey weighed 190 but was very lean; he went for speed which worked for his style. He'd be 210 now for sure. Ok, many would,d be competing at cruiserweight but there were enough big guys out there for a decent showing.

You don't think men were capable of weighing 225+ in 1920?

 

What a strange way to negatively word a question.

But to answer, yes I do think men were capable of weighing 225+ in 1920.

 

Interesting no one is pointing out that more often than not the extra weight today's "superheavies" carry is mostly additional body fat. You have your outliers like Joshua and Klitschko but you don't see many guys over 230 with a ripped physique you mostly see loose skin and soft mid sections

 

Joe Gans would get beat to a pulp by someone like Duran, Pac and Chavez, and would be embarrassed and totally outclassed by guys like Whitaker and Mayweather.