Why is boxing the only sport where the older greats are always better?

earnie shavers would beat pac

 

I stopped caring about it.

Anytime I read a discussion about Floyd vs any pressure fighter. The first Castillo fight is always brought up like its the key.

Despite the fact that he hurt in that fight.

They always say so and so was better than Castillo, imagine what he'd to do Mayweather. atsch

Then if the 2nd fight is brought up, its completely ignored.

 

pac by KO..:yep

 

part of it is because we pick the best old fighters and have more to work with. we're not picking elmer ray vs wlad because elmer was sloppy and shitty in his technique. we're not picking chalky wright vs pac because as good as chalk was, he'd get destroyed. older fighters are better cause we have 200 years worth of them to choose from vs a limited number of modern day fighters. if you asked if wlad vs the old timers would win i'd have TONS of past heavies to choose from, thus stacking the odds in my favour

 

Seriously is it that big a deal?

 

:good

 

I tried to give some examples before..in terms of how the overall culture of boxing has changed.

What Im trying to say is that if you want to use sprinting as an anaolgy..then modern boxing is run over a shorter distance, with less protective shoes, their are several sprinting world bodies where the champion of each can lay claim to being world champion..I cant really think of how to work the advent of more weight divisions into that, but it all comes back to the dilution of what it means to be champ.
Does that make sense?

Overall old timers are NOT always better...no way.

There is hardly anyone I would pick over Roy at 160-168...The list of people I see beating Wlad at his best is very short..I dont think I would pick anyone to beat Mayweather at 130 in the 12 round era especially.
People who beat Manny IMO are only the very best of the best in each division he has won a title..apart from fly IMO where he was clearly pre-prime.
Joe weighs in at 168 against anyone in history, not many are getting the better of him.
I think Sweet Pea beats every lightweight there has been...guys like Duran, Ortiz and Leonard are pretty much tossups..but at his best he could beat them all IMO..considering that is pretty much the strongest division ever I think you get my point regarding how I consider some modern day fighters.
I think someone like Orlando Canizales is among one of the best fighters I have ever seen...and I could go on and on.

That being said boxing overall hasnt got much better if at all...its just changed to suit the environment it is in today. The Networks around the globe bankroll it, including the ones in Europes, and therefore a fighter like Arturo Gatti becomes a megastar, whilst a fighter like Pongsalek Wonjongkam is hardly heard of beyond hardcore fans.

 

How is what is said in the court of public opinion on a BOXING forum a big deal? I'm just curious as to why all the fervor over what ATG beats a current fighter or vice versa.

Ultimately it boils down to a matter of opinion which can't be proven right or wrong either way...more so it boils down into a juvenile pissing contest which this thread WILL be by tomorrow morning.

 

The 2nd fight is the reason why I pick some pressure fighters against Floyd..He won it easy but he also packed up shop for a long periods in that fight and got hit more then in just about any fight I have seen him in since, whilst in his prime and 100% fit.

That being said its only the best pressure fighters Im referring to like Duran and Chavez... JLC is essentially a poor mans Chavez.

Its not as simple as pressuring Floyd = beating him..Those fighters just bring so much more to the table.

 

Most people don't do enough research about older fighters to really make a distinctive statement. It's just a lot easier to knee jerk about it because you've seen fighter a x amount of times in comparison to fighter b y amount of times.

This CERTAINLY swings both ways of course. And a lot of the times people pick old fighters because it's easy to pile on...and if someone throws up a legit post, it's easier to just quote it and add a +1 to it to cover up for the fact that you don't know either way.

If more people said "I don't know" instead of forcing themselves to make a definitive response, things would be a lot smoother here.