Disadvantages Of Being Big

[Bundana]

I don't think they are off . . . I was offering possibilities as to why the KO mean was twice as high for the 2000 group than the 1930 group.

Why did you think I was challenging the numbers.

P.S. Sorry I see my mistake now, when I said 'off' I meant off from eachother. E.g. 55% vs. 27%. Sorry I confused.

No problem!

And I get, why numbers like these may come as a surprise to many. We have always been told, that the old-timers were these tough warriers, molded by tougher times, who always gave their all. And I'm sure some did!

But there must have been a lot of boxers, who likely were more interested in just collecting the paycheck - after putting in a minimum of effort, rather that trying to flatten the opponent. With this in mind, the very low KO% we find for these boxers, shouldn't come as a huge surprise.

[Willie Pep 229]

No problem!

And I get, why numbers like these may come as a surprise to many. We have always been told, that the old-timers were these tough warriers, molded by tougher times, who always gave their all. And I'm sure some did!

But the majotity of the large group of journeymen were probably more interested in just collecting the paycheck - after putting in a minimum of effort, rather that trying to flatten the opponent. With this in mind, the very low KO% we find for these boxers, shouldn't come as a huge surprise.

You don't think early stoppages plays into the numbers? We had that whole Steele-Lane period where it seemed referees were trying their hardest to see who could stop a fight the quickest.

My other point about mismatches I think may have had a bigger effect. Championing the prowess of the old timers I think that there were fewer men entering the ring unprepared.

But I also see the validity of your point about fighting often and not seeing the need to seek out KOs.

I think this may bring us back to TV and its demand for not only undefeated records but exciting KOs as well.

[dreamroom]

yeah seriously, I wanna hear a list from all these people claiming he’s a master boxer? In my opinion hes imitating master boxers but only half understands what he’s doing because hes probably on his own. You can see hes actively trying to improve his skills though so he is a thinking man. But his skills really only look good against Wilder because Wilder essentially has no boxing pedigree whatsoever.

its another example
of a contemporary fighter randomly
waking up and watching a few old tapes and suddenly figures out we have been gaslit this entire time. The guys hes fighting don't even know what hes doing so of course it works. Wilder literally hobbles around on stilts, chicken winging and telegraphing everything, even the expression on his face is a telegraph. All his pro fights did was build his confidence so he doesn’t tire as bad anymore. Remember his first 40 fights were against club fighters at small venues. Then he’s in the gym doing high intensity upperbody strength workouts while neglecting his lower body strength (his balance is terrible). I wonder if they realize his weak legs force him to plant his feet which is also probably giving him that power while taking away any defensive capability or mobility he needs.You know old school fighters meticulously worked on sitting and moving so they could transition on the fly. Chavez sr was pretty good at this.

You are spot on about footwork/leg strength. Mike Tyson was fanatic on shifting and moving combined with leg training, thousands of squats. I can attest to the fact, when you loose your legs, you're done. Since my motorcycle wreck in 2016, I've had 5 major surgeries on my hips, knee and lower leg reconstruction. My last surgery was March 12th. I'm still rehabbing my right knee, and my legs are so weak it's unbelievable. Anybody out there that has 2 healthy legs and takes it for granted, is crazy. I started back on some heavy bag and reflex bag work 2 weeks ago and OMG........As much as it kills me to say it, your legs mean everything in boxing, and how they are, so goes your boxing ability. I used to be able to run shifting drills, slip line drills like it was nothing. Now, I can barely shift at all. I have a long road ahead of me. On top of the wreck, I'm old, and recovering is the hardest thing I've ever done in my life.

[Bundana]

You don't think early stoppages plays into the numbers? We had that whole Steele-Lane period where it seemed referees were trying their hardest to see who could stop a fight the quickest.

My other point about mismatches I think may have had a bigger effect. Championing the prowess of the old timers I think that there were fewer men entering the ring unprepared.

But I also see the validity of your point about fighting often and not seeing the need to seek out KOs.

I think this may bring us back to TV and its demand for not only undefeated records but exciting KOs as well.

When I examine records of the old-timers, I find mismatches on a whole different level, from what we see today. Stuff that simply wouldn't be tolerated now. Look how a world ranked Stribling, as a veteran of more than 200 pro fights, met several absolute nobodies, who had never won (and would never win!) a fight. Or how future HOFer George Godfrey, likewise met complete no-hopers with hardly any fights, when he himself was a seasoned veteran of 100+ pro bouts. Could we today imagine a world ranked boxer like, say, Joseph Parker engage in a string of "stay busy" fights against complete unknowns, with not a single win under their belt? No, of course not!

Early stoppages is something that is almost impossible to examine... since we have no film of the majority of fights back then. So we can't really know, one way or the other.

What we do know, is that lots and lots of boxers at the time were thrown out for not only making little effort - but for making no effort at all! Boxers who held back so blatantly, that the ref refused to accept it as being an honest match, and sent the two boxers packing. Hundreds and hundreds of boxers suffered this humiliation. Among them some of the absolute top men... such as Godfrey (x4), Shade (x4), Rosenbloom (x2), Slattery (x2). Even the great Mickey Walker was once thrown out (along with his opponent, Jimmy Jones) in a welterweight title defense - and suspended for one year for taking part in a sham fight!

I think it's safe to say, that not all old-timers went for the KO all the time!

[Nash out]

When I examine records of the old-timers, I find mismatches on a whole different level, from what we see today. Stuff that simply wouldn't be tolerated now. Look how a world ranked Stribling, as a veteran of more than 200 pro fights, met several absolute nobodies, who had never won (and would never win!) a fight. Or how future HOFer George Godfrey, likewise met complete no-hopers with hardly any fights, when he himself was a seasoned veteran of 100+ pro bouts. Could we today imagine a world ranked boxer like, say, Joseph Parker engage in a string of "stay busy" fights against complete unknowns, with not a single win under their belt? No, of course not!

Early stoppages is something that is almost impossible to examine... since we have no film of the majority of fights back then. So we can't really know, one way or the other.

What we do know, is that lots and lots of boxers at the time were thrown out for not only making little effort - but for making no effort at all! Boxers who held back so blatantly, that the ref refused to accept it as being an honest match, and sent the two boxers packing. Hundreds and hundreds of boxers suffered this humiliation. Among them some of the absolute top men... such as Godfrey (x4), Shade (x4), Rosenbloom (x2), Slattery (x2). Even the great Mickey Walker was once thrown out (along with his opponent, Jimmy Jones) in a welterweight title defense - and suspended for one year for taking part in a sham fight!

I think it's safe to say, that not all old-timers went for the KO all the time!

This is a point the Great Nash has brought up many times, but a lot of the old-timers just don't want to hear it. I'm talking about the mismatches. I could list hundreds of fighters as examples from the past, but Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. is a classic example. What he was allowed to get away with as so-called opponents is absolutely laughable. Nowhere close to being stay busy occasional journeyman, but guys who have never fought, never won, or never won against anyone else who has won, and a "good opponent" on JCC's resume would class as someone with a record of W6 L4, all wins and losses to other journeyman.

Guys today get flack for fighting someone who is number 15 in the division. Chavez was barely fighting anyone in the top 200. Not saying he wasn't a good fighter, but the amount of times the amount of wins he has are brought up as though it means something, is a very misleading stat into how good he is.

I remember when Hughie Fury first came on the scene and when he was around 5-0, and clearly a good prospect that was way better than any journeyman, Peter Fury joked about having him out every week fighting poor/average opponents around the world for the experience, and getting him to 100-0. Had he done that, there is little doubt that Hughie would have got to 100-0, so numbers by themselves mean absolutely nothing.

Chavez beating 60-70 people, who half in the audience could probably have beaten, literally proved absolutely nothing, and he was just fooling the public with his record. A record that had more padding than George Constanza's Gore-Tex coat. Nash out.

[Willie Pep 229]

This is a point the Great Nash has brought up many times, but a lot of the old-timers just don't want to hear it. I'm talking about the mismatches. I could list hundreds of fighters as examples from the past, but Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. is a classic example. What he was allowed to get away with as so-called opponents is absolutely laughable. Nowhere close to being stay busy occasional journeyman, but guys who have never fought, never won, or never won against anyone else who has won, and a "good opponent" on JCC's resume would class as someone with a record of W6 L4, all wins and losses to other journeyman.

Guys today get flack for fighting someone who is number 15 in the division. Chavez was barely fighting anyone in the top 200. Not saying he wasn't a good fighter, but the amount of times the amount of wins he has are brought up as though it means something, is a very misleading stat into how good he is.

I remember when Hughie Fury first came on the scene and when he was around 5-0, and clearly a good prospect that was way better than any journeyman, Peter Fury joked about having him out every week fighting poor/average opponents around the world for the experience, and getting him to 100-0. Had he done that, there is little doubt that Hughie would have got to 100-0, so numbers by themselves mean absolutely nothing.

Chavez beating 60-70 people, who half in the audience could probably have beaten, literally proved absolutely nothing, and he was just fooling the public with his record. A record that had more padding than George Constanza's Gore-Tex coat. Nash out.

The other side of the argument regarding Chavez.

The wrong you argue is correct but responsibility lies with those who over valued his record.

It is NOT that Chavez was deliberately building a record but that he was a Mexican fighter fighting in the Mexican boxing universe.

Before America (the scantioning bodies) became aware of Chavez he was fighting for paydays in the same manner the old timers in the USA did. Many easy fights for a check and to stay fighting

What one can say is that Chavez was the one fighter that came out of that universe undefeated. Proved himself the best lightweight fighter Mexico had. (Even Monzon had a couple of early slips.) So there was something special about the achievement but certainly NOT to the extent American television/promoters/fans played up the undefeated record.

Blame us not Chavez. He was not cherry picking weak opponents, he was just a Mexican fighter.

[Nash out]

The other side of the argument regarding Chavez.

The wrong you argue is correct but responsibility lies with those who over valued his record.

It is NOT that Chavez was deliberately building a record but that he was a Mexican fighter fighting in the Mexican boxing universe.

Before America (the scantioning bodies) became aware of Chavez he was fighting for paydays in the same manner the old timers in the USA did. Many easy fights for a check and to stay fighting

What one can say is that Chavez was the one fighter that came out of that universe undefeated. Proved himself the best lightweight fighter Mexico had. (Even Monzon had a couple of early slips.) So there was something special about the achievement but certainly NOT to the extent American television/promoters/fans played up the undefeated record.

Blame us not Chavez. He was not cherry picking weak opponents, he was just a Mexican fighter.

Good point, Willie Pep. Also though, the Great Nash is hoping that somebody appreciates their line - A record that had more padding than George Constanza's Gore-Tex coat. Nash out.

[QueensburyRules]

You are spot on about footwork/leg strength. Mike Tyson was fanatic on shifting and moving combined with leg training, thousands of squats. I can attest to the fact, when you loose your legs, you're done. Since my motorcycle wreck in 2016, I've had 5 major surgeries on my hips, knee and lower leg reconstruction. My last surgery was March 12th. I'm still rehabbing my right knee, and my legs are so weak it's unbelievable. Anybody out there that has 2 healthy legs and takes it for granted, is crazy. I started back on some heavy bag and reflex bag work 2 weeks ago and OMG........As much as it kills me to say it, your legs mean everything in boxing, and how they are, so goes your boxing ability. I used to be able to run shifting drills, slip line drills like it was nothing. Now, I can barely shift at all. I have a long road ahead of me. On top of the wreck, I'm old, and recovering is the hardest thing I've ever done in my life.

- - I'd suggest you take it easy and let time with minor activity sooth your misdeeds. Mother Nature has her own timeline you may not understand.

[YGriffith]

From my experience, when there's a huge difference, i have a problem seeing attacks coming on the inside, or when the ring is small i tend to find myself on the ropes alot, otherwise i like being the taller guy.

[QueensburyRules]

- - Biggest disadvantage with being BIG is having none, nunca, zero advantages of being small...simples...