Were the past greats really that great!?

[hearnsfan86]

Lets talk about a subject that becomes very heated amongst the old school and new of boxing fans. How do the old legends of boxing stand up to the new breed?

Im not talking about fantasy matchups between duran and pacquiao, the pugilistic art hasnt changed that drastically in that space of time. Im talking about the likes of gene tunney, jack johnson etc......All are are ring legends, and deserve to be, but how would they fare against the modern era?

The reason i ask this is because i have been a boxing fan for 9 years now, there is only so many archived fights i can watch until i wound up looking up these guys that so many boxing historians talk about. And i know im going to get blasted for this....but i was not impressed.

Jack Johnson, who many historians believe would have beaten any heavyweight from any era is one that stands out. In the fight i watched with jess willard i wasnt overly impressed. Its not that its in black and white and old grainy footage. Ijust dont see the skill shown by the older boxers. Wheres the head movement? the bobbing and weaving? the defense!?!?! most of the time the 2 fighters are winging punches from the waist and dont have their hands up to defend themselves.

Dont get me wrong, i respect the hell out of these guys, youd have to respect fighters that have hundreds of fights back in those days, with the small gloves etc...It just seems to me that it was more fighting back then as opposed to boxing. It was about hard as nails men who could punch and take a punch. When you look at the likes of mayweather jr, with his impeccible defense, fast as lightning hands. is it logical to assume that these primitive fighters would have beaten our new breed??

Maybe im being stupid and am missing something. But isnt it just a case of boxing has evolved? A 1920s manchester united would be dumbfounded by the 2011 squad. Is boxing much different???

[slickhook]

Merced Solis is somebody that is never brought up. A true great!

[shawowski]

I agree with you, my friends dont share the same opinion tho. With todays training and nutrition science and the evolution of man becoming faster and stronger, i think modern fighters would have a better chance

[Slyboots]

I agree with you as well. Boxing and boxers themselves have evolved a great deal since those times. Take Joe Louis for example, he would get ****ing sparked by the likes of Tyson, Lennox Louis and The Klit brothers in my opinion.

[F l i c k e r]

Different eras.

Many of them wouldn't be as great now as they were then.

Even SRR. I can see him earning losses even in this era.

[ИATAS]

they actually all sucked because all of those guys pushed off and clinched, which is totally illegal, therefor they were all cheaters!

[IronDanHamza]

Lets talk about a subject that becomes very heated amongst the old school and new of boxing fans. How do the old legends of boxing stand up to the new breed?

Im not talking about fantasy matchups between duran and pacquiao, the pugilistic art hasnt changed that drastically in that space of time. Im talking about the likes of gene tunney, jack johnson etc......All are are ring legends, and deserve to be, but how would they fare against the modern era?

The reason i ask this is because i have been a boxing fan for 9 years now, there is only so many archived fights i can watch until i wound up looking up these guys that so many boxing historians talk about. And i know im going to get blasted for this....but i was not impressed.

Jack Johnson, who many historians believe would have beaten any heavyweight from any era is one that stands out. In the fight i watched with jess willard i wasnt overly impressed. Its not that its in black and white and old grainy footage. Ijust dont see the skill shown by the older boxers. Wheres the head movement? the bobbing and weaving? the defense!?!?! most of the time the 2 fighters are winging punches from the waist and dont have their hands up to defend themselves.

Dont get me wrong, i respect the hell out of these guys, youd have to respect fighters that have hundreds of fights back in those days, with the small gloves etc...It just seems to me that it was more fighting back then as opposed to boxing. It was about hard as nails men who could punch and take a punch. When you look at the likes of mayweather jr, with his impeccible defense, fast as lightning hands. is it logical to assume that these primitive fighters would have beaten our new breed??

Maybe im being stupid and am missing something. But isnt it just a case of boxing has evolved? A 1920s manchester united would be dumbfounded by the 2011 squad. Is boxing much different???

Like who? Name me some Historians who think Jack Johnson would beat any Heavyweight from any era.

You talk about old school fighters being 'primitive' and 'fighters instead of boxers' then how does that explain the likes of Charley Burley, Kid Gavilan, Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson, Ray Robinson, Willie Pep the list goes on and on who are frankly anything but that?

[hearnsfan86]

didnt expect everyone to agree tbh, thought i was gonna get called a traitor to the sport haha

[hearnsfan86]

The likes of SRR, the cuban hawk and the wil o the wisp are different. Im tlking about older fighters. Ive heard countless interviews with boxing experts say that the older fighters always beat the new. Bert sugar has been quoted saying jack johnson beats many of the new fighters.

[KingTito]

The sport's evolved a lot. Naturally, the athletes have evolved as well. They were definitely great. Things are just different now. I recognize it as being different times, and that's that.