Are modern Boxers Bigger,Stronger, and faster then Boxers of the past?

Boxers of the past,barring European fighter were more technical,I think todays American fighters,well the Majority anyway have abandoned the basics and evolved,"not necissarily bad",into more of a reflex and athletically driven force.But the European fighters have stuck to the basic fundimentals of boxing and thats why they have so much champions emerging so suddenly!!So I believe that the fundimentally sound fighters of times past would compete just as well now as they did then!!Bernard Hopkins is the perfect example of the last of the truly fundimentally sound American fighters right now in my oppinion!!

How were they able to go on for so long in the old days when they had unlimited rounds? What was the record number of rounds for a fight?

there is like a cut-off point in the early 20th century, where boxing seemed to take one big step forward and evolve from what was generally quite a crude sport to a real technical science, and since has remained pretty stagnant i believe the likes of Robinson, Joe Louis, Barney Ross, Gene Tunney etc, would be just as great if they competed today

I find it really hard to compare fighters of the past that fought 15 rounds, or even before that when there was no end, to the fighters today. Since the matches lasted much longer, they fought much differently, fought at a slower pace to conserve energy, etc. The fighters today fight at a faster pace and may look better in those terms, but if they were fighting 15 rounds they would go much slower too, and if guys like Marciano and Louis fought 12 rounds they would go at a much faster pace. Although I do agree that some tactics have gotten very advanced in the modern era, like the rope-a-dope that Ali made famous, worked great in his time, you'll be lucky to use that successfully against a journeyman now, a lot of the tactics back then are almost nullified in these times. old school tactics are equally if not more effective today than yesterday jabbing vertically fisted...palming with your right while throwing a jab etc

Human evolution takes place over thousands of years, not a few decades. Jimmy Wilde would not be the size of Valuev if he'd been born 70 years later. In any case, how many boxers today are bigger than Jess Willard? How many could run 100 yards in 11 seconds like Jim Jeffries could? Boxers train largely the same way now as they did 50 years ago. Running, skipping, sparring, heavy bag, speed bag. The sport hasn't changed a great deal in that time, other than the introduction of fewer rounds, larger gloves, new weigh-in rules and various other safety measures. There is also a lot more to being a great boxer than just athletic prowess. They need heart, chin, technique, guts, timing and so forth. So no I don't agree with the gist of this thread that moderns are somehow "better" than old timers. Imo a great fighter would be great in any era.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fighterspast.html http://coxscorner.tripod.com/myth.html Here are some good articles about it, especially the first one. I'd say some are better and some are worse. It just depends on the style match up. I find it really hard to compare fighters of the past that fought 15 rounds, or even before that when there was no end, to the fighters today. Since the matches lasted much longer, they fought much differently, fought at a slower pace to conserve energy, etc. The fighters today fight at a faster pace and may look better in those terms, but if they were fighting 15 rounds they would go much slower too, and if guys like Marciano and Louis fought 12 rounds they would go at a much faster pace. Although I do agree that some tactics have gotten very advanced in the modern era, like the rope-a-dope that Ali made famous, worked great in his time, you'll be lucky to use that successfully against a journeyman now, a lot of the tactics back then are almost nullified in these times. It's not really that much of a faster pace, there were still fights that were fought at a fast pace and there are still fights today fought at a slow pace. The Battling Nelson and Ad Wolgast lightweight championship held on Feb 22, 1910 was called “for concentrated viciousness... the most savage bout I have ever seen” wrote W.O. McGeehan in the New York Herald Tribune. Michael Hunnicut agrees, saying it is “the best fight I have ever seen on film.” They fought to the 42nd round. Nelson, a swarmer, like Ricky Hatton, averaged 85 punches a round. He threw 90 in the 30th round. They slowed in the 39th. Nelson, the loser, threw 70. These guys threw just as many punches-a-round as one sees in a 12-rounder today, but they did it for over 40!

Yes :boxing::boxing::boxing::boxing:

I find it really hard to compare fighters of the past that fought 15 rounds, or even before that when there was no end, to the fighters today. Since the matches lasted much longer, they fought much differently, fought at a slower pace to conserve energy, etc. The fighters today fight at a faster pace and may look better in those terms, but if they were fighting 15 rounds they would go much slower too, and if guys like Marciano and Louis fought 12 rounds they would go at a much faster pace. Although I do agree that some tactics have gotten very advanced in the modern era, like the rope-a-dope that Ali made famous, worked great in his time, you'll be lucky to use that successfully against a journeyman now, a lot of the tactics back then are almost nullified in these times.

fighters of today might be better than the fighters of the past (except for those legends that proved their status), since techniques are being improved and developed along with the athleticism, conditioning and training of the fighters.

For most sports I would say yes but for boxing I would have to say no. I think many of the champions of the past would of done fine in this era. When its all said and done its still just fighting. Well boxing is different. There are weight classes. So the question of whether they are bigger now, doesn't really apply unless your talking about the heavyweight division. And the answer to your question in that case: The Klitschko Brothers.

We have better diet and training today. More people means more genetic combinations to produce better athletes. But I think boxers were hungrier back then, fought waaaaaaay more, and some of them were pretty damn good. Guys like Robinson, Louis, Pep, Armstrong, Ali, etc would be great in any era, even (and in some cases especially) today.

For the most part, yes. Athletes evolve in a sense in how they train and diet. Look at the NFL and other sports. The athletes are all bigger, faster and stronger.

ive thought about this. to me, it seems like a yes for some reason. but i dont really agree with the overrated part.

We got steriods now. Ask shane