A key point that proves oldschool fighters were tougher and better chinned

[The Old LefHook]

OK we are poo pooing statistics I understand, but with that understood . . .

We could start by comparing (1930 vs. 2000) 10-counts to TKOs . . . But then comes the real (maybe impossible) work of breaking down the TKOs into 'early stoppages' vs. 'saves.'

Would take much time watching film and of course be subject to much opinion.

P.S. If Bill would just hurry up and get Elon Musk to invent his magic quantum machine for him we would be ready to do it. But for now too many variables at play.

The difference in true ten counts would not mean anything either, since the count gets waved off most of the time these days, whereas they used to complete the count most of the time. The ruferee did not wave off Wilder/Fury 1 though. I wonder if my conjecture is even correct that they completed the count more often in ye old days.

[The Old LefHook]

We disagree on everything but the numbers. We disagree on who was better and who had the better jab or resume. We disagree on who avoided whom. We cannot agree on a superior era.

There is a reason the expression "you can count on it," came about. The only numbers we do not trust are the ones on scorecards, because you cannot count on them. Meaning can be drawn from numbers collected statistically. I thought those two lists (top 84 fighters and 400 selected at random) were truly educational and some of the best stuff I have seen on here.

[Willie Pep 229]

The difference in true ten counts would not mean anything either, since the count gets waved off most of the time these days, whereas they used to complete the count most of the time. The ruferee did not wave off Wilder/Fury 1 though. I wonder if my conjecture is even correct that they completed the count more often in ye old days.

Yea we would have to separate 'wave offs' with the fighter still on the canvas from fighters who get to their but still have the fight stopped anyway, i.e. 'saves.' LOL Too much!

Regarding your conjecture I would bet it to be true.

There have been more then a few fights in my life time where I found myself cringing as the referee kept counting to a full ten when you knew the guy wasn't going to move, never mind get up.

I support 'wave offs'- if just for the fans' sensibilities. Not really sure if five seconds would make a health difference.

Yes to Fury-Wilder I -- I am still not sure if Fury was out or just playing with the fans -- a different referee could have wave that fight off and I doubt there would have been much of a stink other than Fury's people. He looked out.

[QueensburyRules]

Yea we would have to separate 'wave offs' with the fighter still on the canvas from fighters who get to their but still have the fight stopped anyway, i.e. 'saves.' LOL Too much!

Regarding your conjecture I would bet it to be true.

There have been more then a few fights in my life time where I found myself cringing as the referee kept counting to a full ten when you knew the guy wasn't going to move, never mind get up.

I support 'wave offs'- if just for the fans' sensibilities. Not really sure if five seconds would make a health difference.

Yes to Fury-Wilder I -- I am still not sure if Fury was out or just playing with the fans -- a different referee could have wave that fight off and I doubt there would have been much of a stink other than Fury's people. He looked out.

- - Story in the moment was seconds into the hard KD, Fury opened his eyes and winked at the ref as he was taking the count.

I don't recall what the video timer count was, but as modern counts are extended out 15-20sec because of refs putting fighters through assessment exercises, so yeah, that extra time may have been the difference in that fight. Recall Fury immediately drove Deyonce in reverse before ending the round.

[Bundana]

On a more simple level would just comparing ten-counts to TKOs tell us anything?

I would bet good money there were more ten-counts in 1930 than 2000.

I wonder?

I think, you're most likely right! The 86 man group from 1930 had so many more career fights than the 80 man group from 2000 - so with so many more opportunities to land a 10-count finisher, it would be very surprising, if they combined don't "beat" the 2000 guys in this category.

But it's certainly an interesting question, that deserves being investigated further... and since you have brought it up, I take it you will look into this?

[The Old LefHook]

I am looking for the right data to collect, then I will probably give it a try.

[ShoulderRoll]

No hard numbers, but just going by feel: since I have been watching boxing at no time have there been more quick stoppages than during the current era.

Corrales vs Castillo 1 wasn't that long ago. But it feels like getting an epic war like that again is almost impossible with today's quick trigger refs.

Maybe it's just me but this seems to have coincided with all the highlights of UFC ref John McCarthy dramatically jumping in to protect a downed opponent. That might have leaked over subconsciously to boxing.

[them_apples]

One thing to consider, when you made your way up the rankings, you really earned your way there by beating better opposition. Today, with four sanctioning bodies, rankings are all over the place and potential opponents for top contenders and champions are often elevated for no apparent reason. During the 50's and through the 80's you really had to walk through fire to get a title shot, or at least be a proven contender. Now we have fighters getting title shots with less than 20 fights on a regular basis. David Morrell is already making noise at 168 with just 6 fights. Rollie Romero co-headlining a PPV event with just 14 fights--but his mouth and hype got him into an obvious mismatch. Mismatches are quite common in title fights now. In Robinson's day you still had mismatches, but those were more or less "stay busy" fights for top level fighters looking to keep busy earning a paycheck and keeping their skills sharp in between title fights. If you look back on Robinson's record, you'll see a lot of woefully outgunned opponents with losing records who suffered knockout losses in these stay busy fights.

massively good point

[them_apples]

its great that we are considering crunching data now, but let's not forget we need a LOT of it to get a real result, right now it is just another perspective or point we can use to help ground our opinions and avoid biases.

[QueensburyRules]

No hard numbers, but just going by feel: since I have been watching boxing at no time have there been more quick stoppages than during the current era.

Corrales vs Castillo 1 wasn't that long ago. But it feels like getting an epic war like that again is almost impossible with today's quick trigger refs.

Maybe it's just me but this seems to have coincided with all the highlights of UFC ref John McCarthy dramatically jumping in to protect a downed opponent. That might have leaked over subconsciously to boxing.

- - That shoulda been stopped the first time Castillo spit out his mouthpiece to buy time. Shyte refs then and now...only in boxing folks!!!