Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Your opinions: Has boxing progressed or regressed:Modern vs 60's-80's

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by WolfGirl View Post
    I'm not talking about black and white days. Forget that. Let's just start from the 60's.
    60's-80's vs Modern (90's era to current)
    Do you think boxing has progressed since the 60'-80's era? In terms of skill level?
    I want more of an overall comparison, the cream of the crop(Lennox,Floyd,Roy,Evander) will always be the cream of the crop. Regardless of eras.

    I'm talking like comparing the Froch/Cotto/Haye to fighters of their standings/rankings during the older days.



    Please don't ever bring the 'track and field' logic into any boxing debate. Running in a straight line have literally nothing to do with two men fighting.
    Track rarely deal with the intangibles boxing deal with, so it's a horrid comparison.


    My personal view:
    The best of the best for the modern era:
    Lennox,RJJ,Floyd,Hopkins,Pacquiao,Holyfield,Tyson, Whitakker, is equal to the older days of the 60's70's and early 80's.

    But the 2nd tier have fallen off dramatically
    .

    I agree with all this. I think overall they have took a step back slightly when comparing contenders and 2nd tier champions but the elite could comp
    ete in any era.

    Comment


    • #12
      At first thought I thought the regression was only slightly but there has been a huge fall off from now to the 90s

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by croz View Post
        It's progressed. They were saying boxing had regressed back in the 60s. It's just a myth that lingers about boxing and some fans seem to pick it up and hold onto it, I don't know maybe to make themselves stand out.

        You know they're saying the same thing about football right now. There's a big debate on about whether Messi is better than Pele and people side with Pele. It works exactly like boxing, the older they are the more renowned they become. Their myth grows and people willingly choose to believe it. Look at the pattern it runs: Ronaldo is better than Messi, Pele is better than Ronaldo. The larger the myth the larger the support, and boxing feeds on that sort of thing. Saying boxing is dead or devolving is just part of boxing culture which has been around since the year dot.
        Ya but you have to taken into consideration the talent pool available.

        The NFL in America and Soccer in Europe are marketing monsters.
        The talent pool in boxing (at least in America) has definitely become smaller.

        The chances of finding the next Ray Lewis in America is much higher than finding the next Lennox Lewis in America, because the next Lennox Lewis most likely want to be the Next Ray Lewis.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by WolfGirl View Post
          Ya but you have to taken into consideration the talent pool available.

          The NFL in America and Soccer in Europe are marketing monsters.
          The talent pool in boxing (at least in America) has definitely become smaller.

          The chances of finding the next Ray Lewis in America is much higher than finding the next Lennox Lewis in America, because the next Lennox Lewis most likely want to be the Next Ray Lewis.
          Yeah but it's pretty much always been that way. The HW division was only really considered strong in the 70s and 90s. Other than that there are so many weak eras with strong champions - Marcianno and Holmes are the stand outs there who didn't really have much in the way of competition. The HW division only really needs 2 or 3 tough guys to make it interesting, other than that it tends to be filled with scrap. Big athletic guys aren't interested in getting hit in the face when there are other options available, and there have always been other options available. That's nothing new. Remember Marcianno is just a baseball reject who started boxing at age 23. The same **** is still going on today.

          That's why the progress of the sport should never really be judged on the HW division. Many of the lower weights are doing great right now and behave like phenomenal boxers. All these people want to do is say it isn't like the old days when they don't realise in ten years time other people will be saying the exact same thing about today's fighters. People need to appreciate what they have when it's right in front of them.

          Just look at Hatton who got little credit from boxing fans when he was first active. Shortly after he retired you had people saying he would wipe the floor with some of these new guys. On that same note I remember reading another poster who said on another site, and I quote "**** these fighters today they don't fight for ****. If Gatti were still alive he'd smash Mayweather even if he was forty years old"

          Obviously the guy knew nothing about boxing but it shows how people seem to get instantly attached to the retired or even dead guys. It's like they suddenly get lifted to Valhalla when they finish.
          Last edited by croz; 11-21-2012, 07:36 PM.

          Comment


          • #15
            Inside fighting. Nearly gone in today's world. Which surely must be a result of the crappy amatuer system. that alone is a big sign of regression.

            Comment


            • #16
              In the Boxing World modern day boxing is from the 1930s to NOW! If you mean right now as in this ten year it would be "Current" not modern! Theres terminology in every sport and in boxing modern is a very broad era!
              I think that boxing skills has stayed the same in the past 10 to 20 years but the number of talented boxers has dwindled in the weight classes above Lightweight! This isn't anything new boxing goes through ethnic and cultural changes all the time. Hopefully the Donaires and Broners will be here for ten years and show their talents and accept challenges that intrique fans.
              Four or five really good heavies would certainly help too! HA! Ray.

              Comment


              • #17
                The best will be competitive in ANY era.

                It's the guys they fought on their way to the top that have regressed.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by THE ИATAS View Post
                  Inside fighting. Nearly gone in today's world. Which surely must be a result of the crappy amatuer system. that alone is a big sign of regression.
                  More than that. Most trainers don't want their guys to take hits, and they favor the outboxing style more and more. Milking your guy via not taking as much damage seems smart, but even then sometimes trainers just don't know what their guy is good at.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Skill wise it has regressed. The absolute top of the sport is as good as always, but so many divisions are so bad, even if they are competitive. Top of the division fighters are unbelievably inept at basic stuff like using a jab or going to the body or moving your head or cutting off a ring.

                    You can watch guys who weren't particularly special in the 60s-80s and see them all doing those little things that you rarely see today.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Regressed. If you vote otherwise YDKSAB.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP