When is it viable to compare fighters from different era's

[rightsideup]

Hello fellow posters.

I was wondering what criteria is required to compare fighters from different era's.

For example the great trainer ray arcel saw fighters from the late 1910's until the early eighties and his faculties were still intact as he was working the corners of world title bouts so if I asked him to compare benny leonard to roberto duran he could easily do so.

Please feel free to post your thoughts.

[Ray Corso]

Knowledgable boxing people will compare skills and education(experience)! the average fan needs to use common opponents or other statistics, they don't know techniques or are able to understand "willingness" of a fighters passion to win.
Arcel is a wealth of knowledge from his "experiences" and certainly knows the entangables that the great fighters had and maintained. Styles make fights so common opponents can be very overated when judging a fighters abilities.
My opinion of Freddy Brown & Ray Arcel is their at the highest pinnacle of trainers, corner work (ability to take care of a fighter and break down the opponent)!!! They were the type of trainers that fighters layed it all on the line for!!! Ray.

[atomicsad]

Comparing different eras is not completely accurate because they fought different opponents. If everybody fought the same guys it would be easier.

[jabsRstiff]

The problem with comparing eras is when you get into the head-to-head stuff.

If you're talking about how fighters rank in terms of greatness.....then you rank them for how great they were for their particular era. I never saw any real footage of Harry Greb, so I don't know how he'd do against Marvin Hagler if they (magically) fought. But, I'm willing to concede that Greb was greater for his era than Hagler was his....

[rightsideup]

Originally Posted by jabsRstiff

The problem with comparing eras is when you get into the head-to-head stuff.

If you're talking about how fighters rank in terms of greatness.....then you rank them for how great they were for their particular era. I never saw any real footage of Harry Greb, so I don't know how he'd do against Marvin Hagler if they (magically) fought. But, I'm willing to concede that Greb was greater for his era than Hagler was his....

I know this goes off my orginal topic but I am wondering JabsRstiff is you consider Ray Leonard better in his era than Marvin?

[jabsRstiff]

Originally Posted by rightsideup

I know this goes off my orginal topic but I am wondering JabsRstiff is you consider Ray Leonard better in his era than Marvin?

Ray Leonard was a greater fighter than Marvin Hagler. Hagler's my favorite fighter of all time, but Ray Leonard was THE best fighter from that era- which was an incredible era.

[Panamaniac]

Originally Posted by rightsideup

...I was wondering what criteria is required to compare fighters from different era's. Please feel free to post your thoughts.

If it must be done at all, anytime is as viable as it will ever be. The only criterion would be the pre-existence of the fighters. Nothing can ever be proven, it's strictly speculative and subject to personal biases. It's always good debate fodder on forums of this nature.

[BigStereotype]

Originally Posted by Ray Corso

Knowledgable boxing people will compare skills and education(experience)! the average fan needs to use common opponents or other statistics, they don't know techniques or are able to understand "willingness" of a fighters passion to win.
Arcel is a wealth of knowledge from his "experiences" and certainly knows the entangables that the great fighters had and maintained. Styles make fights so common opponents can be very overated when judging a fighters abilities.
My opinion of Freddy Brown & Ray Arcel is their at the highest pinnacle of trainers, corner work (ability to take care of a fighter and break down the opponent)!!! They were the type of trainers that fighters layed it all on the line for!!! Ray.

So let me get this straight... knowledgeable people compare conjecture and average people use indisputable fact? You realize that that is NOT something an intelligent person would say right?

You can compare any fighter from any era, you just have to make sure you temper your expectations to the era. If you compare resumes straight up, guys from pre-1960 are going to get a big boost because they fought so much more (for the most part) so they beat more quality guys. I personally don't think there's much difference in fighters since 1920 (and quite few before then could hold up too).

[Ray Corso]

Boxing can be an art form, if you look and study artists like Robinson and Pep and Gans to B. Leonard you'll see the correct way to throw punches, slip, counter, block etc thats correct technique! Thats what most fans don't know!

If you want to call me names go ahead but I'm the one who's appeared in The Garden NYC, Blue Horizon Philly PA, Joe Louis Arena Detriot MI., USA Olypic Training Center Colo. Spr.Colo. (head coach for Region One USA), La Metro Milan, Italy. Miami Civic Center Miami Fl.

..............etc another words your on a forum talking about me and I'm the guy who worked in the sport training top amatuer USA boxers and working with Champions of the World in the Pros!!

But ofcourse you know more????? hahahaha!!!
Listen I'm saying your this that or the other but to have question me throw out some credentials and experiences ok, you sound like a stero-typical fan!
Whats your "indisputable fact" finder?
As far as era's the fighters from the 30's thru to the early 60s to me are the best fighters because they used boxing skills to fight with. There was no amatuer boxing (international) to screw up a young man from learning how to fight using boxing skills! Ray.

[BigStereotype]

Originally Posted by Ray Corso

Boxing can be an art form, if you look and study artists like Robinson and Pep and Gans to B. Leonard you'll see the correct way to throw punches, slip, counter, block etc thats correct technique! Thats what most fans don't know!

If you want to call me names go ahead but I'm the one who's appeared in The Garden NYC, Blue Horizon Philly PA, Joe Louis Arena Detriot MI., USA Olypic Training Center Colo. Spr.Colo. (head coach for Region One USA), La Metro Milan, Italy. Miami Civic Center Miami Fl.

..............etc another words your on a forum talking about me and I'm the guy who worked in the sport training top amatuer USA boxers and working with Champions of the World in the Pros!!

But ofcourse you know more????? hahahaha!!!
Listen I'm saying your this that or the other but to have question me throw out some credentials and experiences ok, you sound like a stero-typical fan!
Whats your "indisputable fact" finder?
As far as era's the fighters from the 30's thru to the early 60s to me are the best fighters because they used boxing skills to fight with. There was no amatuer boxing (international) to screw up a young man from learning how to fight using boxing skills! Ray.

I didn't say I know more. I'm saying that most of the time, arguing about conjecture is going to get you know nowhere. My "indisputable fact" finder is a combination of boxrec and footage. As for those credentials, I understand if you don't want to prove them what with the whole Rockin' fiasco, but you have to understand that I'm a little slow to just take you at your word for it. You talk about your vast knowledge so much but you rarely display it.

Also, saying that "most fans" don't know that fighters punch and slip and block and counter is just bizarre. WTF are they watching?