Past Fighters

[TysonBomb]

Were they really more "skilled" as people claim? They are usually more revered than the more "modern" fighters of today.

Guys from the 70s and older seem to be seen as better fighters than guys from today. Especially the heavyweights. Are the current heavyweights really that bad?

People overrate old timers like Robinson, Louis, Marciano, Walcott, Jack Johnson etc.

Many people would argue that someone like Marciano would have a chance against Tyson and would win by KO

Or that Joe Louis would beat Lennox Lewis

[Salardo]

its just the way it is. right now the klitschkos, pacquiao and all them guys are considered as garbage compared to the old school fighters. and in 50 years the klitschkos and the other top fighters of this era will be regarded as absolutely AWESOME. its just the way it is. i dont know why it is that way, but i know that it IS that way

[rightsideup]

I am a fan who started watching fights around 1979 and then also watching fighters of the past as well. I am getting back into it again and do see some talented fighters out there today. I think the new fighters will not be evaluated as atgs until there carreers are over but we should not understate there skills either. As far as comparing tyson to marciano whose carreers have already transpired that is open for debate. I thought Tyson would overpower Holyfield based on evanders performances just prior to that fight and I was wrong as were many other people. I recall watching Vlad fight Lennox Lewis and thinking this guy would be back and it took awhile but he is a good fighter fighting at an advanced age.

[damuttz112]

its just the way it is. right now the klitschkos, pacquiao and all them guys are considered as garbage compared to the old school fighters.

You're totally off the mark. Most Boxing analysts respect there qualities.

[Capaedia]

We only remember the best 'old school fighters'.

This is a long period of time, so obviously there are going to be a larger quantity of great fighters over a span of say, 90 years, than there are going to be fighting in the present.

Therefore it's fully possible, maybe likely, that the best talents are going to be one of these men that we still remember, not one fighting today. Not because of a bias towards old-school fighters.

It's just simple math.

Again, we don't remember the no-hopers. They have always existed and always will. And very seldom will one of them be remembered. In fact, I can only think of one. Joe Grim. That's solely because of all the dudes he fought and didn't get KO'd.

^I copied this from when I posted it in another thread. Sue me

[Layzie Kidd]

In my opinion its the ****ty poke for points style. Where everyone copies a Muhammad Ali type style (And not as skilled as him) and dilly dally for points most the time.
And crappy trainers who teach fighters, then they become trainers and you see what we get now on its steady decline which has resulted in it being what it is today and the sport being a bore for the most part. Its the old timers that actually came to fight, not p*ssyfoot.


You can even see it in technique when you watch these recent men, none of them throw a punch with a full weight shift punch.

[Scott9945]

I've been following boxing for more years than I want to admit. And I swear all I've ever heard is how boxing used to be better. I loved boxing then and I love it now, so I'm not commenting. It doesn't matter to me. But it's something I've always heard.

[Anthony342]

I've only been watching for about 20 years so what I've read and heard from journalists and analysts and even on local radio is that there's a loss of technique, nobody bobs and weaves or parrys, etc. or few do and there were better trainers in the old days that passed on their teachings to other fighters who then passed them down themselves, which seems to be less common now. So this probably has something to do with it. I mean, we only remember the greats, but there were so many more years ago then now. I mean, who now is considered great? Mayweather, Pacquiao, maybe Marquez, Cotto, Mosley?

Years ago, you could rattle off so many names like Holyfield, Tyson, De La Hoya, Whitaker, Jones, Lewis, Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Leonard and so on. These type of skilled and exciting fighters seem to be fewer and further between and the few out there don't get as much TV airtime as they would've 20 years ago. Now, it's pretty much whatever few guys HBO or Showtime decides to show or ESPN 2.

[SBleeder]

What's funny is that you can't conceive that a fighter from the mid 50s (Marciano) could beat a fighter from the mid 80s (Tyson)... yet I can almost guarantee that you'd scoff at the notion that a fighter from today (early/mid 2010s) could beat a fighter from the mid 80s (Tyson).

Tyson's "prime" was nearly 30 years ago, and I doubt you'd pick any fighter since then to beat him.


You claim that fighters from yesteryear are "overrated" without introducing a scrap of evidence to support that claim.

And yes, Joe Louis would mop the floor with Lennox Lewis.

[Ray Corso]

I watch techniques and then the methods used by a fighter in the sport of boxing to quantify them.
Most fans look at a boxers personality and how they "look" when they fight!
They know very little about styles and techniques used within those styles. Plenty of fans think of Duran or Tyson as crude fighters because their style isn't Ali like! Or that Marciano was a crude fighter because they can't see his steps and positionings as he moves in! If your not on your toes double jabbing and flurring in combination your not a refined boxer!
They haven't a clue that a fighter could be working on setting up their opponment in the second round to be able to take advantage of that set up in the fifth! If boxing was that easy all the wrestlers and mma guys would be boxers!!

As far as the greats from years ago comparing to todays fighters its pretty easy to see. A fighter like Jake Lamotta would put his life on the line to win at all costs you don't see that type of effort from most of the modern day fighters. Mayweather doesn't come to win he waits for his opponents to begin to lose!! When his opponents don't go all out as Oscar did at the end of their fight Floyd comes on to win. He's not a front runner, crowd pleasure he's a cautious counter guy that can only fight this way now a days. If he was in the "live gate era" he'd be forced to perform at a higher level!
Thats a reason why people like me who know the history of boxing and personally know a few of the greats from the past say the things we say!
Its not myth, its right in front of my eyes and I don't hate fighters the way fans do. I have respect for anyone who climbs in the ring and I applaud a fighter who gives his max effort even if his talents don't match up to his opponents!! Willingness with effort has alot to do with a fighters success, sometimes more than talent! If you have ALL of those components your usually considered great! Ray.