What was the third best era for heavyweights?

[Willie Pep 229]

So Klit was drugged against Brewster? Any evidence for this excuse?

His performance ?

[ShoulderRoll]

His performance ?

Was that being drugged?

Or Klit just getting mentally broken? It wouldn't have been the first time.

[billeau2]

- -Old line informed history forum seems now mostly dominated by hysterical sopranos.

Wlad immediately beat Byrd for the WBO, and not long after DKing signed Byrd to fast track the IBF title that Lewie sold to King. The Ks and Steward steadfastly refused to do any biz with DKing fighters after the Wlad drugging in the Brewster fight. There was no $$$ in a Byrd/Vitali rematch anymore than Wlad could rematch Sanders for his title when Sanders was obligated to fight his WBO mandatory that he was ditching to fight Roy Jones that was the Glory Fight every heavy not named Field was after. Roy ditched King and the IBF to fight a ****** trilogy with Tarver who in spite of being such a mediocre boxer managed make out with Roy's invincible mojo that made him an nonentity in the heavy div.

Wuz anyone here watching boxing then

How convenient!

[Ben Bolt]

Nobody a bigger fan of baseball than I

I had fun at an episode of cartoon Simpsons.

Homer’s idea of a perfect evening was to buy some packs of beer and watch baseball on telly.
One evening, he had no beers at home, but sat down to watch a baseball game.
Sober this time, he got shocked:
“Is this the sh *t I use to watch?”

What intrigues me about baseball is the enormous pressure on the pitcher.
Some seasons ago, I watched this young pitcher having his dream come true,
making his MLB debut on home ground. But it turned into a nightmare.

After the 1st inning, he had let go of four points to the opponents. His team trailed 0–4.
Yet, he had to show up for the next inning. In front of his family, friends and the home fans –
the same home fans that had celebrated him before the match start, now hating him.
The poor guy was substituted after the 3rd inning.

[JAB5239]

How convenient!

Just when you think he couldn't be any more ******......BOOM!!

[them_apples]

1. If you are averaging rounds per all the fighters then yes... because there are more fighters today more rounds are fought. If you are looking at the top echelon of professional fighters, then no... the top professional fighters fought much more than a champion today. Just look at how many fights were fought by the average top 20 in each division or so. But an average of rounds fought only speaks to quality when we consider some measure of excellent fighters. its hard to come up with a cut off point here...A point where we decide what fighters to look at. Obviously if we average out a professional career, we need a cutoff if we are trying to average rounds. That is a bit of a rabit hole frankly.

There is nothing wrong with fighting the same opponents often... different factors come into play, but it is equalized: both opponents know each other better. the best fighters arguably were the Black fighters like the Johnson era fighters and Murderer's row... and they fought each other plenty!

2. Experience is always the best teacher. its not boxing per se. If a fighter fights more under a set of conditions (professional prize fighter) they will have more experience and be better. Calculated? How so? Maybe like, We are talking about taking a period... oh lets say from Johnson to Louis, and having a cutoff, maybe top 20 fighters for each division and seeing how many fights they had compared to a period from maybe the 1970's to the present... That might work.

3. There were more gyms per the amount of professional fighters. Not more gyms total. And I am talking boxing gyms. Not gyms that have a boxing trainer on hand.

4. Don't know what is "wrong" but the Eastern Bloc fighters fought in an Ammy style, it was, and is well known. The analogy is not wrong so much as misappropriated. Just like when people took the work of Charles Darwin and tried to make it a social commentary.

5.Is boxing purely a function of athletic prowess? innovation? Or is it a function of hardship, the mastery of that which is longstanding... We have been punching each other in the face a long time... by comparison we have been playing field sports (soccer, football, etc) maybe for 500 years or so... So when we change football,make it a professional money maker, attracting better athletes, learn different ways to create plays, alter the athletes who play the sport, then actually your analogy about capitalism holds true... as it does for Most sports. When I was a kid, to throw a baseball 75 MPH, in high school was amazing... I caught a collegepitcher as a 14 year old who threw about 80-85... Catfish Hunter, one of the best pitchers in the game threw average about 85... Now? lets just say people can throw a baseball a lot harder!

Boxing is different because it does not have big money and institutions that support it... Stamford, harvard, Berkely, all the major universities make a fortune being a farm system for the NFL. Boxing money does not even show unless one is very very good. this has the effect of limiting the talent pool. So, we may get more fighters but we are getting less of the top percentage of athletic talent that goes instead to better paying sports... It also has the effect of limiting training opportunities. Boxing gyms are hard to maintain financially. The effect of this is to draw more talent through the amatuer ranks. The amatuer style takesless training and is less comprehensive than traditional professional prize fighting. We are, in effect getting more, less talented fighters... there are more of them, and more competition among them, this is true.

6. Of course it is about tradition. Tradition means that there is a system in place to develop talent. Tradition dictates that there will be better facilities, better trainers, etc. This is why even today, Eastern Euro and other fighters fight out of places like Nevada and New York City. That is my point. You canhave more people, more average stronger, faster, smarter people because of numbers... but a funnel effect happens when we get to the top prize fighting prospects. So, your assertion that there are more fighters now, means very little IMO when discussing very talented prizefighters.

7. I have always said look at film and watch what fighters are doing. If I watch a 1956 Colts football game and compare it to a 1990's 49's game... and watkch a few series of plays this is what I will notice: The Colts are doing very basic plays... the quarter back is looking for one reciever. By comparison Steve young has multiple recievers running patterns, quickly! he may shoot pass to secondary reciever...etc etc. its pretty easy to see form an eye test that one team is doing a lot more, with a lot more sophistication than the other team.

This also applies to boxing. If I watch a typical heavyweight fight there is little to no body punching, movement, both guys are squared up, they throw few punches, not much counter punching going on... usually amatuer style...Simple linear footwork jab step jab step, etc. If Icompare that to a typical fight in the 50's a relatively weak era as well, I see fighters going to the body, countering punches, more shoulder and head movement, etc etc.

What is wrong with this? lol

Also the guys today don't even have to be that good to make money. Back in the day nobody made money but the champ, and there was only one champ. So the word effort is often an overlooked attribute.

On too of this, yeah if you fight a lot more you are not only gonna be better, but more conditioned to fighting under the lights and pressure, as well as taking a punch. I think a lot of guys get hurt so easy now because they just aren't used to it.

[cfang]

70s defo best. A host of outstanding heavys, then 90s.in both those eras guys ranked 7 to 10 were still excellent and famous. I would go 80s next. You had holmes and a prime tyson too. Cooney, spoon, dokes, page, tubbs all decent fighters.

Next for me would be 60d, then 30s then 00s

[QueensburyRules]

Just when you think he couldn't be any more ******......BOOM!!

- -I only have to be smarter than U rust buckets.

Easy work, sorta like falling off a log with a six pack of iced beer and 6 pack of chili and cheese bean tacos in each hand, breakfast, lunch and dinner rolled into one.

[billeau2]

- -I only have to be smarter than U rust buckets.

Easy work, sorta like falling off a log with a six pack of iced beer and 6 pack of chili and cheese bean tacos in each hand, breakfast, lunch and dinner rolled into one.

Then we have identified the problem: I guess I owe you an apology... It turns out that peaches Valentine aka Queenie is sSO SMART that he does not have to rely on historical facts, common sense and logic to come to his conclusions... Just the random conflux of things, like poo thrown on a wall forming certain archetypical patterns. Or like a moron on a log losing his lunch.

[QueensburyRules]

Then we have identified the problem: I guess I owe you an apology... It turns out that peaches Valentine aka Queenie is sSO SMART that he does not have to rely on historical facts, common sense and logic to come to his conclusions...

- -I cast U swine the pearls of the 5 most talked of fighters 90s' records. Need to root around in U hog pen slop to find them mixed in wif U swill