Why are past HWs with many losses respected, while modern ones with losses are not?

[Holywarrior]

Because 12 year olds can be on the internet.

[Weltschmerz]

I see people on the various forums ridiculing Chris Arreola and Bermane Stiverne because they have a few losses (Stiverne 1 loss and 1 draw).

Why do people forgive past heavyweights for their losses and still respect them, yet are so harshly negative about current heavyweights?

- Bob Satterfield had 25 losses, but is respected
- Tony Galento had 26 losses (and was shorter and fatter than Arreola)
- "Gunboat" Smith had 28 losses
- Jersey Joe Walcott had 18 losses
- Ezzard Charles had 25 losses

They say "but they beat a good fighter" but that fighter they beat had lots of losses too. And some of the boxers that beat them weren't so good.

Are some people being TOO HARD on modern heavyweights? Do modern boxing fans make too much of a loss on a heavyweight's resume nowadays?

Haven't we all had a some poor days at work, when we are less productive and/or less focused for some reason (the baby was sick and crying all night so we couldn't sleep, some crisis with a teen aged son/daughter, stomach flu, etc).

Because they are nostalgic, old bitter men for the best part.

You find them in every murky corner on these boards. I experienced it first hand.

[LoadedWraps]

I see people on the various forums ridiculing Chris Arreola and Bermane Stiverne because they have a few losses (Stiverne 1 loss and 1 draw).

Why do people forgive past heavyweights for their losses and still respect them, yet are so harshly negative about current heavyweights?

- Bob Satterfield had 25 losses, but is respected
- Tony Galento had 26 losses (and was shorter and fatter than Arreola)
- "Gunboat" Smith had 28 losses
- Jersey Joe Walcott had 18 losses
- Ezzard Charles had 25 losses

They say "but they beat a good fighter" but that fighter they beat had lots of losses too. And some of the boxers that beat them weren't so good.

Are some people being TOO HARD on modern heavyweights? Do modern boxing fans make too much of a loss on a heavyweight's resume nowadays?

Haven't we all had a some poor days at work, when we are less productive and/or less focused for some reason (the baby was sick and crying all night so we couldn't sleep, some crisis with a teen aged son/daughter, stomach flu, etc).

The opposition and talent pool was greater in the past than in this era.

[The Hammer]

The opposition and talent pool was greater in the past than in this era.

Or is that a myth.

Look more closely. There are actually more heavyweight boxers now than in past decades.

[The Hammer]

Throw Wlad in with the Vitali that Lennox fought, see if Wlad still looks like a great 38 years old then. He looked great against a terrible fighter.

Leapai isn't much good, but to be fair he was WBO mandatory.

Wlad looked very good against the then ring #1 Kubrat Pulev.