Tweet
Well the eye test doesn't work that we'll in boxing because there is a massive attribute that is overlooked all too often, and that is the psychological aspect. Truly great fighters believe in themselves and are ruthless competitors. To simplify it, the word would be effort - they simply try harder and everyone else around it can feel it, and backs down to them knowing they can't match it.
This is outside of "skills" and physical attributes, which tell only half of the story, but may also be the building block of a fighters confidence, so they go hand in hand.
The greatest decade for heavyweights was the 70s, because you had ruthless competitors all with massive egos who thought they were the best. Any other era they would have been the best.
The 90s had a large roster of physical talents, but they didn't all match up in their primes. Holyfield and Bowe ****** it out in a great fight, Lewis came along later - but in my honest opinion would have lost to Holyfield prime for prime, who had a lot of milage already. The 90s was also an era with better camera footage, which added to the effect since all the other eras were "from the stands" and watched from a distance, you only got to see the obvious stuff, not the subtle stuff.
Since boxing, especially heavyweights, seems to have gradually declined, the 90s were the best era where you could actually see everything that was going on.
That being said, the heavyweight division has always been full of excitement but limited in talent. As others have said, Liston was a great fighter, but his competition in his prime was average. The same went for Rocky, who was fighting good light heavies that moved up, Tyson who cleaned up a lot of heartless fighters that were intimidated, and Holmes a great fighter with no real competition. Poor Holmes had to make his own competition with Cooney, I really think he wanted to be great though.
Today's era is also exciting but lacking in talent, any thoroughbred boxing fan knows the Fury, Joshua, Wilder lineup is pretty weak, but it's exciting and good for boxing. They are all equally bad in their own aspects, but carry different styles and personalities.
As for the 3rd best era, my pick would be the 60s. You still had Liston in some decent shape, a young Ali and a slew of decent but not great contenders like Zora Folley, Doug Jones and Cooper. I guess you could throw Big cat in there as a gate keeper for someone with a glass jaw.
This is outside of "skills" and physical attributes, which tell only half of the story, but may also be the building block of a fighters confidence, so they go hand in hand.
The greatest decade for heavyweights was the 70s, because you had ruthless competitors all with massive egos who thought they were the best. Any other era they would have been the best.
The 90s had a large roster of physical talents, but they didn't all match up in their primes. Holyfield and Bowe ****** it out in a great fight, Lewis came along later - but in my honest opinion would have lost to Holyfield prime for prime, who had a lot of milage already. The 90s was also an era with better camera footage, which added to the effect since all the other eras were "from the stands" and watched from a distance, you only got to see the obvious stuff, not the subtle stuff.
Since boxing, especially heavyweights, seems to have gradually declined, the 90s were the best era where you could actually see everything that was going on.
That being said, the heavyweight division has always been full of excitement but limited in talent. As others have said, Liston was a great fighter, but his competition in his prime was average. The same went for Rocky, who was fighting good light heavies that moved up, Tyson who cleaned up a lot of heartless fighters that were intimidated, and Holmes a great fighter with no real competition. Poor Holmes had to make his own competition with Cooney, I really think he wanted to be great though.
Today's era is also exciting but lacking in talent, any thoroughbred boxing fan knows the Fury, Joshua, Wilder lineup is pretty weak, but it's exciting and good for boxing. They are all equally bad in their own aspects, but carry different styles and personalities.
As for the 3rd best era, my pick would be the 60s. You still had Liston in some decent shape, a young Ali and a slew of decent but not great contenders like Zora Folley, Doug Jones and Cooper. I guess you could throw Big cat in there as a gate keeper for someone with a glass jaw.
GhostofDempsey
........
Comment