Tweet
All of them
Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android
Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android
-
-
[QUOTE=Capaedia;12630290]Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby
a lot of those fights have even made it to youtube.
robinson's MW tenure (the 50's) was quite well filmed.
trojans is the history section's eccentric.Comment
-
-
I wont say who would win between Joe Louis and Lennox Lewis, there were guys as big as Lewis back then but they were not as good as Lennox, or at least they werent as successful. What I will say is that there is simply no comparison pound for pound,, or in skills or KO ability...... Joe Louis in my view is at least 5 times better fighter than Lennox in just about every department especially speed and nous, Joe Louis was the ONE and ONLY HW champion for over a decade, and some of those bums of the month were far from bums.Originally posted by SBleeder View PostComment
-
Evolved to what exactly ?.... heres something you dont know......... in the old days, say pre 60's one thing a fighter must have to enjoy any king of success was value to the paying crowd, you couldnt just go out and cruise at second gear because you are Floyd Mayweather fighting a much slower plodding guy who is too afraid to commit himself to seriously trying 100 per cent to destroying Floyd even at risk of his own life.... If Floyd or any modern boxer did that a few times, it wouldnt matter if the guy had lost one fight in his 30... no promoter would book you because the crowds would go berserk.. just look at how many roughnecks like Battling Nelson were so famously popular back then... oh how popular would a Battling Nelson type be today.. he'd be worth 100 million bucks just for losing let alone winning..... and those guys did it for not a real lot,, only a few fighters before 1950 got rich.--------------------------------------------------------- -------------------. but what I am saying is that expectations of the fans were wayyyyyyy higher way back when. crowds were also many times more knowledgeable and impatient if the action slowed. boxing was once almost the only show in town, in places like Maitland it WAS THE ONLY ENTERTAINMENT on a weekly basis. to be a world champ in any of the 8 divisions you were famous on a scale a modern could only dream about. After all in 1900 - somewhere in the 50's, boxing was the biggest sport on earth... almost everyone was a fight fan in 1920.Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View PostComment
-
so its Harry Grebs fault he lived in an era where most films will simply turn to powder within 30 years of the fights ?... is it Eddie McGoortty's fault that only one round of his extensive career survives,,,,,, is it even fair that in the round that survives he is getting his butt kicked and knocked down 4 times and with the last blow hes blasted into a pile of human remains half dead by one of the all time best Middleweights ?... nope, not fair that Frank Klaus, and hundreds of other noteworthy fighters... hell, for half of the entire history of boxing film hadnt even been invented, we know men have been capable at fighting since year dot. Just cos you didnt see the battle of Waterloo doesnt mean that all those people didnt die that day... Floyd Mayweather would be Floyd Mayweather in 1880 or any other time.. film does not make a fight. its just a privledge.Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View PostComment
-
Yep and there are many in the history of sport like SRR.. Don Bradman is the stellar example. that guy was twice as good as any batsman to ever live, before or since, and he began playing Test Cricket in 1928... I can say this because cricket is like baseball, statisics are almost impossible to argue with, and no one but a blithering idiot would ever suggest there has been a better player since he retired, maybe Bradman is an anomaly, a once in a millenium talent, I dont know, I do know I cant find a predecessor to him that was close to half as good, so maybe he is on his own in sports .. apart from Walter Lindrum in billiards,,, also a game dominated by statistics, Boxing is way different to billiards and cricket, and there may actually be a GOAT in boxing but the difference between the top 20 (whoever they are ) of all time guys is minimal and intangible.Originally posted by Riggsy Pooh View PostComment
-
[QUOTE=Capaedia;12630197]lol..... nice comeback, best since ray leonardsOriginally posted by simbrosComment
-
[QUOTE=SCtrojansbaby;12630211]LOL, I just knew thats exactly what you would say. Man why are you still here spamming threads in the HISTORY section... please look up the word HISTORY in your dictionary, its a key word as to why most of us visit this HISTORY forum. I seriously think you do this just to annoy us.Originally posted by Capaedia View PostComment
-
Comment