Could today's fighters adapt?

[JAB5239]

Another interesting way is to assess the percentages. How much of each era's career (total fights) was consumed before getting a championship fight.

Fighter X of current times had 60 fights in his career and waited 23 fights before he got a title shot. Fighter Y of older times had 150 fights and waited 50 fights for his title shot. In that regard, fighter X waited "longer." But the upshot is fighter Y still gains more experience.

Another way is to look at their ages when fighters won their titles. Were older era fighters slightly older when they became champions? Boxing in general will always be a young lion's game, right?

This thread was never supposed to be about men that were already champions and how often they fought, but the amount of fights it took to work your way up and the physical trials and tribulations that come with such a hectic schedule.

[Bundana]

This thread was never supposed to be about men that were already champions and how often they fought, but the amount of fights it took to work your way up and the physical trials and tribulations that come with such a hectic schedule.

If we're talking "physical trials and tribulations" on the way to winning a world title... how do we compare (for example) Benny Leonard and Vasyl Lomachenko?

[Ivich]

Who was OLD? Only Joe Louis and Archie Moore was over 35 among Rocky's opponents, and Moore fought great after 35.

Walcott was 38.
Savold was 36.

[Ivich]

Read my mind.

nobody even bothers to actually watch rock. They donÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt see how good he is. This is why I hate arguing with people about Marciano, because they have hate glasses on that will not allow them to. Marciano actually fought and beat some very good fighters, but more than that - itÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs HOW he beat them. Just watch.

while Walcott, Moore and Charles were extremely game and some could even argue close to their best. Moore got himself in tremendous shape for the match - and was always in shape in general.

another thing people donÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt realize that doesnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt make any sense - is they say Marciano beat light heavies. But Marciano pretty much WAS a light heavy. No he couldnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt effectively make 175, but all 3 of those guys barely could either. Walcott and Charles certainly couldnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt. They weighed even more than Rocky on fight night.

either way you look at it, heÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs the same size as them and destroys 3 atgÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs in a short period of time. Destroys them. If this doesnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt at least raise an eyebrow from you then its the hater glasses. You also should take in he gave them rematches that ended much earlier and to be honest, never even began.

then you have Liston, people tout as the most underrated heavy, his most famous win is knocking out Floyd Patterson, a man much smaller and weaker than him. Why is Liston rated so highly?

itÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs obvious to any real boxing fan that Marciano is a league above a Liston. But 99 percent of todays boxing fans would disagree. They are wrong though.

itâÂÂs actually bothersome how the history section is littered with idiots now that donâÂÂt understand what they are missing. Years ago when Marciano wasnâÂÂt long gone, it wouldnâÂÂt have gotten this bad. People knew how good Marciano was. HeâÂÂs the one you never bet against. He understood fighting was a test of wills.

you have speed
you have power
you have strength
you have iron chins
you have staminaâ¦

what people donâÂÂt take into account is effort, the most important of all. This is both mental and physical.

For their 1 st fight Charles ,at185 1/2lbs was2 lbs lighter than Marciano.

Moore's weight yo, yo'd up and down all the time.5 months before fighting Marciano he was 18lbs heavier to fight Valdes.

Moore had 3 wardrobes of clothes in different sizes,it's well documented .He worked out in a rubber suit when he had to defend his title.In some fights he came into the ring in shorts that nearly came up to his *******!

Marciano didnt destroy Charles.Ezz went the distance in their fight fight and cut Marciano badly enough for him to require stitches.Marciano was behind in the 1st Walcott fight.
Charles cut Marciano so badly in their2nd fight the referee stated he was thinking of stopping the fight.
Walcott decided to stay down in their 2nd fight,
Can you ease up a bit with the hyperbole?

[Ivich]

Read my mind.

nobody even bothers to actually watch rock. They donÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt see how good he is. This is why I hate arguing with people about Marciano, because they have hate glasses on that will not allow them to. Marciano actually fought and beat some very good fighters, but more than that - itÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs HOW he beat them. Just watch.

while Walcott, Moore and Charles were extremely game and some could even argue close to their best. Moore got himself in tremendous shape for the match - and was always in shape in general.

another thing people donÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt realize that doesnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt make any sense - is they say Marciano beat light heavies. But Marciano pretty much WAS a light heavy. No he couldnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt effectively make 175, but all 3 of those guys barely could either. Walcott and Charles certainly couldnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt. They weighed even more than Rocky on fight night.

either way you look at it, heÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs the same size as them and destroys 3 atgÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs in a short period of time. Destroys them. If this doesnÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt at least raise an eyebrow from you then its the hater glasses. You also should take in he gave them rematches that ended much earlier and to be honest, never even began.

then you have Liston, people tout as the most underrated heavy, his most famous win is knocking out Floyd Patterson, a man much smaller and weaker than him. Why is Liston rated so highly?

itÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs obvious to any real boxing fan that Marciano is a league above a Liston. But 99 percent of todays boxing fans would disagree. They are wrong though.

itâÂÂs actually bothersome how the history section is littered with idiots now that donâÂÂt understand what they are missing. Years ago when Marciano wasnâÂÂt long gone, it wouldnâÂÂt have gotten this bad. People knew how good Marciano was. HeâÂÂs the one you never bet against. He understood fighting was a test of wills.

you have speed
you have power
you have strength
you have iron chins
you have staminaâ¦

what people donâÂÂt take into account is effort, the most important of all. This is both mental and physical.

Marciano never fought at175lbs.

Charles was a natural light heavy who fought over 120 fights at or around the weight.He had a load at middleweight too.
Moore matured into a natural light heavy having 90 odd fights at or around the weight.Having started as a welterweight.
Mathews was a originally a welter and didnt weigh183lbs until the end of1949.

All of them had loads of fights at light heavy ,all of them were ranked at the weight .One, Moore was champ at the weight,another Charles is considered by most the greatest 175pounder ever!
All three were blown up light heavies who could make the weight and were top ten ranked there!
Marciano was a natural, [for the times,] heavyweight.who never fought at lhvy.

Please stop rewriting boxing history,making totally incorrect statements to big up your hero.

Marciano was a great fighter you constantly typing over the top, laudatory, fan boy love letters about him does him no good service .
Patterson at189 and 194 1/2lbs was bigger than all Marciano's challengers except 38 years old Walcott, and fat ****ell who was 30lbs above his best weight.

[Ivich]

too ****** to realize you made his point for him.

You are too ****** to understand he was attempting to equate Marciano , a career heavyweight with Moore and Charles, who began as respectively a welter and a middleweight and who were both at their best at light heavyweight.
A fact that is incontrovertible and undeniable.
Charles was ranked no3 in42 , Army , no2 at lhvy in 46,no 1 in 47.


Moore was ranked no 1 at lhvy in45,no 3 in46,no 2 in47,no 3 in48, no 2in49,no 1 in50,no 2 in51Champ in 52 ,and champ for the following ten years!

Both were LIGHTHEAVYWEIGHTS. Probably the 2 greatest ever at 175lbs !

Neither were ever as good at HEAVYWEIGHT.

Charles turned pro weighing160lbs

Moore turned pro weighing148lbs;

Marciano turned pro weighing192lbs!

Spot the difference?

Mathews had104 fights, in only 9 of these was he over 180lbs, and his heaviest ever weight was 1831/2 lbs.

Now run along, back to your silly stories about ancient Greeks who nobody gives a good **** about .

YOU RAVING LOONEY!

[Ivich]

WHAT? Moore was not good at heavyweight? If you believe that, you should not post here.

FFS Get somebody to explain it to you!!!!!
This is my statement!

Both were LIGHTHEAVYWEIGHTS. Probably the 2 greatest ever at 175lbs !

Neither were ever as good at HEAVYWEIGHT. NOTE THE WORD AS.

ie Both are all time great light heavies,Ever seen anyone rank them in the all time top ten at heavyweight?

Your reading comprehension hasn't improved any has it!
BTW .My quote which you end every post of yours with is not anti USA ,it's anti Trump!

But, as you prove with every post ,you make, you can't read properly.

[Bundana]

If you knew the reality of it

its just as absurd to think the numbers mean much at all. Cause in the end I highly doubt they do. Like weight for example.

If I knew... what exactly?

[them_apples]

You are too ****** to understand he was attempting to equate Marciano , a career heavyweight with Moore and Charles, who began as respectively a welter and a middleweight and who were both at their best at light heavyweight.
A fact that is incontrovertible and undeniable.
Charles was ranked no3 in42 , Army , no2 at lhvy in 46,no 1 in 47.


Moore was ranked no 1 at lhvy in45,no 3 in46,no 2 in47,no 3 in48, no 2in49,no 1 in50,no 2 in51Champ in 52 ,and champ for the following ten years!

Both were LIGHTHEAVYWEIGHTS. Probably the 2 greatest ever at 175lbs !

Neither were ever as good at HEAVYWEIGHT.

Charles turned pro weighing160lbs

Moore turned pro weighing148lbs;

Marciano turned pro weighing192lbs!

Spot the difference?

Mathews had104 fights, in only 9 of these was he over 180lbs, and his heaviest ever weight was 1831/2 lbs.

Now run along, back to your silly stories about ancient Greeks who nobody gives a good **** about .

YOU RAVING LOONEY!

marciano I believe came in at 179 for one of his fights.

either way, crazy how 5 lbs means so much to you. Everything else gets thrown out the window. Charles hardly looked smaller than Rocky. Nobody in their right mind would think Marciano won because of size. Absurd idea

Foreman was 235 in the ams, 217 in the pros??

also how old were Archie and Charles?

[them_apples]

For their 1 st fight Charles ,at185 1/2lbs was2 lbs lighter than Marciano.

Moore's weight yo, yo'd up and down all the time.5 months before fighting Marciano he was 18lbs heavier to fight Valdes.

Moore had 3 wardrobes of clothes in different sizes,it's well documented .He worked out in a rubber suit when he had to defend his title.In some fights he came into the ring in shorts that nearly came up to his *******!

Marciano didnt destroy Charles.Ezz went the distance in their fight fight and cut Marciano badly enough for him to require stitches.Marciano was behind in the 1st Walcott fight.
Charles cut Marciano so badly in their2nd fight the referee stated he was thinking of stopping the fight.
Walcott decided to stay down in their 2nd fight,
Can you ease up a bit with the hyperbole?

wait a minute, so Moore was a bigger man in certain fights? Perhaps thats why he lost? Lol he didn’t weigh enough!

Marciano beat Charles so badly he was never the same. The rematch would prove this. But you aren’t able to recognize a certified beating