What defines "prime"?

age doesn't have anything to do with it but usually and aged fighter is not in his prime. Isn't this sort of a contradiction? Maybe you could be more specific my friend.

So you would agree that age does not determine prime then? age doesn't have anything to do with it but usually and aged fighter is not in his prime.

Ok, heres another question. How do we determine a fighters prime if they were locked up for what we percieve as "key" years (such as Tyson) or even banned from fighting (such as Ali)? Personaly, I think in Ali's case it is pretty obvious he was at his physical peak when the goverment screwed him over. But it wasn't until his return, when some of his physical gifts had faded, that he had peaked mentaly. Opinions? yeah I think ali definitely missed a large chunk of his physical prime when he was unable to fight. i think though he had his mental prime after that which helped him have the legendary overall career that he had. The difference between him and some of todays fighters is his career prime spanned both his mental and physical prime.

Ok, heres another question. How do we determine a fighters prime if they were locked up for what we percieve as "key" years (such as Tyson) or even banned from fighting (such as Ali)? Personaly, I think in Ali's case it is pretty obvious he was at his physical peak when the goverment screwed him over. But it wasn't until his return, when some of his physical gifts had faded, that he had peaked mentaly. Opinions?

Yes I agree with that, I think to define prime under one term it's tough because there are 2 primes, the mental and physical like DWiens said. The problem is sometimes they dont happen at the same time. i think that that is a very good point. you could even add another that you can have a physical prime, a mental prime and maybe a career prime where you face your best competition and all of them may not be at the same time and have an overlap between them. suppose its what makes it interesting too and also hard to define prime. I think take joe c for example and maybe this is a bad one. He was in his physical prime in his early fights and then as age and hand problems set in he used his mental game and adapted his style. His career is now only entering its prime in terms of competition though.

How would you define Mike Tysons prime? Here is a guy who's whole everything concerning a prime seems backwards. Between 19 and 22 he was at his mental prime. as he got older You would have expected him to be mentally stronger, yet we got the opposite. As far as his physical prime I think that is open to debate. Looking at the whole picture though, here is a guy who's so called prime was over before he was 24 years old. An age when many fightewrs are just coming into their primes. Hopkins is the opposite of Mike. This is a very subjective topic, but many posters throw the word out there without ever really thinking it thru in my opinion. mike tyson's prime "could" have been in his late 20's but with the death of his adopted father and his manager and his 3 year prison sentence, his mental state went downhill instead of uphill. So tyson's prime was in the 80's instead of the mid 90's as it should have been.

It when a fighter is at his peak both physically and mentally, different fighters peak at different times.

Good post. Co-sign. A fighter might be mentally at his best before or after he's as developed as can be in terms of physical skill. And some guys have mad talent/physical strengths but a shitty mentality, sometimes before they gain experience, sometimes after they suffer a bad defeat. How would you define Mike Tysons prime? Here is a guy who's whole everything concerning a prime seems backwards. Between 19 and 22 he was at his mental prime. as he got older You would have expected him to be mentally stronger, yet we got the opposite. As far as his physical prime I think that is open to debate. Looking at the whole picture though, here is a guy who's so called prime was over before he was 24 years old. An age when many fightewrs are just coming into their primes. Hopkins is the opposite of Mike. This is a very subjective topic, but many posters throw the word out there without ever really thinking it thru in my opinion.

mental and physical primes rarely ever happen at the same time. physical prime is usually reached in the early 20's and mental is in your late 20's(in boxing). The prime would be the equilibrium of the 2. and that is why its very hard to define when anyone's prime really is. Good post. Co-sign. A fighter might be mentally at his best before or after he's as developed as can be in terms of physical skill. And some guys have mad talent/physical strengths but a shitty mentality, sometimes before they gain experience, sometimes after they suffer a bad defeat.

Calzaghe Hopkins example is a good one but the thing is that division has a bunch of old geezers in it a light heavy with the exception of a few guys. Historically the lower divisions primes were a lot younger because your bones increase in density and weight after around 35 . What amazes me though is guys like Campbell and Marquez who really should be past prime at lightweight, and they are basically still beating good guys. Maybe 40 is the new 30. Do you think a lot of this has to do with nutrition and advancements in the medical field? If so, would some of the greats of the past have been even greater today due to these advantages?

yes it indeed does. I never said that this is the way it should be, I'm just saying no one really knows for sure when anyone's prime is. its mostly all just speculation. when anyone says "he's past his prime" its not like there is a label on that boxer saying what date he will pass his prime. nobody knows. its us the fans that label boxers past their primes. most times a boxer has to be completely shot for us to have complete certainty of their past-primeness. Fair enough my man. I can respect this opinion.

With all due respect Kswiz, doesn't this leave a lot of room for interpetation and misinterpetation? Im just playing devils advocate here because there are so many posts and posters claiming this one was prime, that one was not. Example: I have read that DLH isn't as prime for Pac as he was for May. Yet he has only had one fight between them and pitched a shutout. How do we form these conclussions? yes it indeed does. I never said that this is the way it should be, I'm just saying no one really knows for sure when anyone's prime is. its mostly all just speculation. when anyone says "he's past his prime" its not like there is a label on that boxer saying what date he will pass his prime. nobody knows. its us the fans that label boxers past their primes. most times a boxer has to be completely shot for us to have complete certainty of their past-primeness.

we the boxing fans do. nobody really knows for sure when any boxer is at their prime. most times a boxer is at their prime (like in most sports) between the ages of 27-29. But some reach it later and some earlier. you can't really know for sure. With all due respect Kswiz, doesn't this leave a lot of room for interpetation and misinterpetation? Im just playing devils advocate here because there are so many posts and posters claiming this one was prime, that one was not. Example: I have read that DLH isn't as prime for Pac as he was for May. Yet he has only had one fight between them and pitched a shutout. How do we form these conclussions?

Yes I agree with that, I think to define prime under one term it's tough because there are 2 primes, the mental and physical like DWiens said. The problem is sometimes they dont happen at the same time. mental and physical primes rarely ever happen at the same time. physical prime is usually reached in the early 20's and mental is in your late 20's(in boxing). The prime would be the equilibrium of the 2. and that is why its very hard to define when anyone's prime really is.

Yes I agree with that, I think to define prime under one term it's tough because there are 2 primes, the mental and physical like DWiens said. The problem is sometimes they dont happen at the same time. I have to admit, I like this answer. :headbang:

What in your opinion defines "prime"? Was Tyson still prime when Douglas knocked him out, or were his best days behind him? At 36 and 43 respectively, both Joe Calzaghe and Bernard Hopkins are considered old by many fans and experts alike. Yet both are highly ranked p4p. Are they still prime? When does a prime start? B-Hops best years didn't come until he was in his 30's. shouldn't a prime start in your early to mid twenties? Physically, that is. When is a prime over? Are primes lasting longer nowadays because of better medical advancments and nutrition? If so, how can we compare era's gone by's prime fighters with the fighters of today and make logical conclussions? Anybody got some answers? we the boxing fans do. nobody really knows for sure when any boxer is at their prime. most times a boxer is at their prime (like in most sports) between the ages of 27-29. But some reach it later and some earlier due their personal development abilities or just ware and tare. you can't really know for sure.

when a boxer is at the height of his abilities and in the Best shape So you would agree that age does not determine prime then?

When a boxer is in the state (both physical and mental) to give himself the best chance for winning. James Toney was in his physical prime against Roy Jones Jr., but something was not right with his mental framework IMO, which is why I don't think that was prime of a James Toney as you can get, even though there was unanimous disagreement against me.

when a boxer is at the height of his abilities and in the Best shape