Would Jimmy Bivins be P4P #1 Today ?

Hard question to answer because I don’t know exactly how he’d fair against the best and nor do I know how well he’d respond to modern training. What I CAN say is that with many more opportunities to win titles and more divisions to potentially conquer he’d have a chance to make a name for himself

 

You certainly had to be greater, 4 of my p4p top 11 of all time were arguably prime during the 40s, Charles, Louis, Pep and my pick for GOAT, SRR.

 

Well in the 40s Bivins had to compete with the literal Doomsquad of death and despair in Joe Louis, Ray Robinson, Willie Pep, Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles

Now he has to compete against Shakur Stevenson

see the difference?

 

Who has the better wins against better opponents? I couldn't care less about fat sloppy looking SHW. Just another term for fat

 

This content is protected

So this is considered fat now?

Of course dodging the second question.

 

His most consistent run was from 1942-46 where his only blemish was a draw against Bettina. But he did hold 10lb weight advantages over Charles and Marshall when he beat them, and a 17lb weight advantage over Moore.

He's obviously great, but in terms of scrutinizing his resume, he did catch some of the better guys when they were either pre-prime (Charles and arguably Moore), held significant advantages in terms of size and weight (Marshall and Christoforidis) or both. He was obviously great, but 1942-46 isn't necessarily a lock to be p4p fighting in today's environment. The fact that he was something of a weight bully would certainly get held against him, I think.

 

I could see it happening but only for a short while, if bivins implodes as he did irl after 1945.

 

You had nothing to say about my original post so dont start your childish games...Wow so there's a few guys who are in shape while 98% of the SHW are FAT. Your buddy pictured is also a weightlifter who has obviously done roids at some point in his life

 

Excellent information. Thanku for this post

 

In an era of less money, where the sport was essentially relegated to just the US talent pool, and a talent pool diluted by the absence of hundreds of thousands of fighting age men? Tell me more.

 

I pointed out that Usyk overcame challenges Bivins never had to face. Your only response was to try to devalue Usyk’s wins by claiming he beat “fat” fighters, which I showed isn’t accurate. So that’s 0/2 so far, and you still haven’t substantiated what Bivins actually does better than Usyk beyond repeating BoxRec stats.

I’m genuinely open to a technical discussion about the merits of both fighters and what each did well. But so far, instead of engaging on specifics, you’ve avoided the question and taken the easy way out.

 

Bivins resume is much better than Usyks with that said from the little footage of Bivins we have he doesn't look that good IMO but he's resume doesn't lie so probably the footage we have it's not of him at his best.

 

Better fighters then. I am not debating this.

 

Because you cant debate the fact that Bivins best years coincide with World War 2 which witnessed most of the talent in the sport being away helping with the war. Several of Bivins’ biggest wins were over fighters he outweighed so much the fight wouldnt be allowed today. Thats the opposite of being a P4P great.

 

Better single wins than any P4P fighter operating now yes, but so do hundreds of fighters .. too many variables but i doubt it personally.. he lost 25 fights.. you gotta be fairly consistent to be the P4P kingpin these days (its a silly concept anyway to be honest but i join in now & again) & obviously they were different times & circumstances back then & losses were more frequent but would he beat Opetaia & Bivol? Those are the divisions hed be operating in.. it's possible i suppose but i don't think he's one of the fighters u look at & say ye hed probably be the man now.. fighters like Charles, Monzon, SRL, Conn etc yes, but probably not Bivins. Great fighter though.