View Full Version : How do you think Froch, Margarito, Andrade etc. would've done 50+ years ago?


Clegg
03-25-2010, 07:58 AM
There are some boxers currently fighting who are often described as being 'throwbacks' to previous eras. Tough enough to take a lot of punishment and still keep coming, and usually ending the 12th round just as strongly as they ended the first.

I guess there are two possibilities: one, that due to smaller gloves and longer fights, these boxers are able to break people down more often and have more successful careers than they have in the modern era.

The second possibility is that they are less successful, due to the fact that boxers in previous eras tended to be tougher than the ones today, and there would be less opponents with the kind of stamina issues that Jermain Taylor, Cotto and Clottey have.

What do you think?

sonnyboyx2
03-25-2010, 08:57 AM
There are some boxers currently fighting who are often described as being 'throwbacks' to previous eras. Tough enough to take a lot of punishment and still keep coming, and usually ending the 12th round just as strongly as they ended the first.

I guess there are two possibilities: one, that due to smaller gloves and longer fights, these boxers are able to break people down more often and have more successful careers than they have in the modern era.

The second possibility is that they are less successful, due to the fact that boxers in previous eras tended to be tougher than the ones today, and there would be less opponents with the kind of stamina issues that Jermain Taylor, Cotto and Clottey have.

What do you think?

Journeymen at best, contenders never!

TheGreatA
03-25-2010, 11:32 AM
It depends. It's possible that in the 1950's they'd improve their skills greatly and become able to pressure opponents even more effectively than they do now. Some might not agree but I believe the likes of Rocky Marciano, Carmen Basilio and Jake LaMotta were better at what they did technically than the likes of Andrade, Margarito and Froch. The latter are straight-up boxers with below average defense and thus get hit far more than they should. I'm not entirely sure if the boxing trainers of today (there are exceptions) know how to teach their fighter to pressure opponents all that well.

You're right that the boxers of the previous eras tended to be in better condition. That's not taking into account the likes of Mayweather and Pacquiao, whose stamina more than matches any old time fighter, but the chances are that in the 1950's you wouldn't find a top class fighter like Taylor or Cotto who lacks the stamina to go until the late rounds, when you were required to go 15.

Also it should be noted that in the previous eras, Margarito would have likely been a middleweight, Froch and Andrade light heavyweights.

Ortega was the Margarito of his time, tall 5'11 pressure fighter with a granite chin that no one had cracked. See how the supposedly feather-fisted Emile Griffith handles him:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XpYH_fckszE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XpYH_fckszE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Eric Holder
03-25-2010, 12:39 PM
I think they'd benefit from fighting more often if they were pros 50+ years ago not sure about Froch or Margarito but I know Andrade can get pretty huge in between fights at least they'd be in shape year round and even though sparring is great all those extra fights would probably be more beneficial to developing skills

BOLLOCKS
03-25-2010, 12:45 PM
Froch & Tony would be Goats!

BigStereotype
03-25-2010, 07:32 PM
Shane Mosley is another one of those old school fighters. Just look at the way he moves, the way he throws punches - especially combinations. I think he would have done well in any era, because he relies on his blinding speed and power.

One more round
03-26-2010, 12:38 AM
It depends. It's possible that in the 1950's they'd improve their skills greatly and become able to pressure opponents even more effectively than they do now. Some might not agree but I believe the likes of Rocky Marciano, Carmen Basilio and Jake LaMotta were better at what they did technically than the likes of Andrade, Margarito and Froch. The latter are straight-up boxers with below average defense and thus get hit far more than they should. I'm not entirely sure if the boxing trainers of today (there are exceptions) know how to teach their fighter to pressure opponents all that well.

You're right that the boxers of the previous eras tended to be in better condition. That's not taking into account the likes of Mayweather and Pacquiao, whose stamina more than matches any old time fighter, but the chances are that in the 1950's you wouldn't find a top class fighter like Taylor or Cotto who lacks the stamina to go until the late rounds, when you were required to go 15.

Also it should be noted that in the previous eras, Margarito would have likely been a middleweight, Froch and Andrade light heavyweights.

Ortega was the Margarito of his time, tall 5'11 pressure fighter with a granite chin that no one had cracked. See how the supposedly feather-fisted Emile Griffith handles him:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XpYH_fckszE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XpYH_fckszE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

The conditioning methods in those eras were really not as advanced as what is used today, but the reason today that we sometimes find top fighters who struggle to make the distance is because they don't fight as often as the old timers did. In ring activity is crucial to fight fitness. That's why say 60 years ago fighters usually didn't have those stamina problems, even though they did too many long, slow runs, didn't know about aerobic and anerobic systems, didnt know about about VO2 max or whatever, they fought very regularly, and that regular actual ring time they had conditioned them perfectly.

Today the conditioning methods we use are far superior, but the fighters don't fight often enough, and nothing replaces real ring time.

If todays knowledge was combined with more regular activity among the top fighters, we would likely see even greater workrates and intensity.

sonnyboyx2
03-26-2010, 05:59 AM
The conditioning methods in those eras were really not as advanced as what is used today, but the reason today that we sometimes find top fighters who struggle to make the distance is because they don't fight as often as the old timers did. In ring activity is crucial to fight fitness. That's why say 60 years ago fighters usually didn't have those stamina problems, even though they did too many long, slow runs, didn't know about aerobic and anerobic systems, didnt know about about VO2 max or whatever, they fought very regularly, and that regular actual ring time they had conditioned them perfectly.

Today the conditioning methods we use are far superior, but the fighters don't fight often enough, and nothing replaces real ring time.

If todays knowledge was combined with more regular activity among the top fighters, we would likely see even greater workrates and intensity.

some of what you say i can agree with and some i cannot, the vast majority of boxing trainers today are nothing more than glorified gym instructors who have zero boxing knowledge, todays boxers are not as good technically as the fighters from say the 50s, yes we have the odd one or two who are technically as good like Pacquiao & Floyd but the vast majority of todays fighters lack speed & ability yet they are campaigning at a high level of the sport, Froch, Hatton, Klitschko brothers, Valuev, Abraham, Pavlik all lack the boxing ability of fighters from the 50s i also dont go along with your claim that todays training methods are superior for "Boxers"... They maybe superior for athletes but not for boxers, the old adage that weight-lifting slows down a boxer i feel is true, Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson & Floyd Patterson was the 3 fastest heavyweights in history and none of them done weight-lifting.

One more round
03-26-2010, 06:39 AM
some of what you say i can agree with and some i cannot, the vast majority of boxing trainers today are nothing more than glorified gym instructors who have zero boxing knowledge, todays boxers are not as good technically as the fighters from say the 50s, yes we have the odd one or two who are technically as good like Pacquiao & Floyd but the vast majority of todays fighters lack speed & ability yet they are campaigning at a high level of the sport, Froch, Hatton, Klitschko brothers, Valuev, Abraham, Pavlik all lack the boxing ability of fighters from the 50s i also dont go along with your claim that todays training methods are superior for "Boxers"... They maybe superior for athletes but not for boxers, the old adage that weight-lifting slows down a boxer i feel is true, Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson & Floyd Patterson was the 3 fastest heavyweights in history and none of them done weight-lifting.

Ok. That is incorrect. And unless you are actually in the gym today, training and fighting as I do, or coaching, then how do you know what is really going on in the gyms, and what is being taught?


There is always good technicians around. Today we have Floyd and B-Hop, 50 years ago we had Charles and Walcott. (as an example)


That is all misconceptions and ignorance, sorry but true. When weights are used properly for boxing, they don't slow fighters down. And the conditioning methods used today, with much more sprints, intervals etc is far superior to constant long slow running.

But as I said, the old timers were in the ring more, so they were all conditioned to fight better than many guys today.

One more round
03-26-2010, 06:52 AM
And as for how they would have gone......

Well, with Margarito, a big part of his game is having the size over his opponents. He fights with 24 hrs to rehydrate and takes advantage of this by dropping down a lot of weight and filling back up. Now, back in the day, he wouldn't have been able to drop so much weight and would definitely have been fighting as a MW. He wouldn't have had as much size over as many guys and that could have changed things. But then again, he still would have been strong, tough as nails, fit as hell, knows how to use his advantages and probably would have been a top 10 contender and maybe even held the title.

Froch is almost a certified mongoloid with his awkward technique, but that approach kind of works for him. He would have been fighting as a 175lber, and I see him doing about the same. Bangs a few guys out, walks them down, keeps coming, but gets whipped by a good boxer who can take his punch and last the distance. I could see him ranked in the top 10, his power and awkwardness can be formidable, but he only beats a really good technical guy by walking them down and hoping they get tired, I find it hard to see him holding the title.

Andrade would have been at 175 too most likely, and he goes OK but loses to all the good guys. Tough, strong, but not really a top fighter.

So you know, all the guys go basically the same all in all. Margs for instance might trade the size advantage he has over some guys at 147, but he gains the advantage of having an extra 3 rounds to finish with, which benefits his walk up pressure style. So nothing drastic would happen with their standings in the boxing world.

BennyST
03-27-2010, 05:14 AM
If they had the same technique they have to day but fought back then I think they would also not have the 'inside' fighting advantage as the large majority of fighters, and that includes the classic boxers, were much, much better at fighting inside. They had as many tricks inside as Hopkins and Mayweather do now which would negate the advantage they would normally have over some of the top guys today like Cintron, Cotto etc etc.

There were more fighters that were, as an example, like Mosley, to use someone that beat Marg without batting an eyelid. They were boxers but fought inside better than the 'inside' fighters do today.

Either way, I don't think anyone of them would actually have been a champion. High rated contender maybe, but no more. High rated contender then is the same as an ABC champ today mind you.