Joe Gasn vs Floyd Mayweather Jr at 135- In two fights

[Suckmedry]

Of course Floyd has never seen anything like Gans before either. Don't write off the old-timers

Well no Floyd hasn't really seen anything like Gans, most of the guys he fought have been stronger, more explosive fighters.

I am watching some more footage of Gans now, he is very good, especially compared to his contemporaries, but I just think Floyd would be that bit stronger, faster, little bigger, and more skilled and refined over all.

I'm just telling it the way it is man, I don't think Floyd storms through everyone in history, I just tend to think even the best guys of the 40 round or so era were just not quite refined and sharp enough to beat the guys that came after them.

[BattlingNelson]

Do they get any amount of training under the other guy's rules. If not it's simple... each wins under the rules under which he became the best.

The main difference in preparing for fights is not really the training in itself. It's rather the fact that the oldtimes fought all the time so they where always in fighting shape. In fact I would say that they where in better shape on the average than fighters of today. So basically I don't really put much emphasis in so-called modern training.

What we are dealing with is Mayweather fighting at 135 ringside in a 20 round fight with 4 oz horsehair gloves and lots of rough stuff being allowed. 40 rounds as mentioned by the TS wasn't really the norm when Gans was champ but rather 20 or 25.

How well would he do in such conditions? How well will he fight if his hand is broken in say the fifth round with 15 rounds to go? We know that Gans fought several times with broken bones. For example in his famed title winning effort over Nelson he fought 42 rounds despite breaking a hand early in the fight. So we know what Gans is made of. I would say the chances of a Gans win under the old-school format is about 80% at least.

As for a fight under todays rules I would think, as poet indicated as well, that Gans would adapt pretty well. He was a slick technician who could throw every punch in the book and defensively he was the best fighter p4p at the time.They didn't call him the old master for nothing and he might even benefit from stricter refereeing.

When he first won the title he had some 120 wins and only a handful of losses including a suspect loss to ATG Terry McGovern and a loss to ATG Sam Langford.

The abilities and accomplishments that Gans has permits me from giving Floyd more than a 50% chance of winning a 12 rounder. If I have to pick I take Gans.

[Suckmedry]

The main difference in preparing for fights is not really the training in itself. It's rather the fact that the oldtimes fought all the time so they where always in fighting shape. In fact I would say that they where in better shape on the average than fighters of today. So basically I don't really put much emphasis in so-called modern training.

What we are dealing with is Mayweather fighting at 135 ringside in a 20 round fight with 4 oz horsehair gloves and lots of rough stuff being allowed. 40 rounds as mentioned by the TS wasn't really the norm when Gans was champ but rather 20 or 25.

How well would he do in such conditions? How well will he fight if his hand is broken in say the fifth round with 15 rounds to go? We know that Gans fought several times with broken bones. For example in his famed title winning effort over Nelson he fought 42 rounds despite breaking a hand early in the fight. So we know what Gans is made of. I would say the chances of a Gans win under the old-school format is about 80% at least.

As for a fight under todays rules I would think, as poet indicated as well, that Gans would adapt pretty well. He was a slick technician who could throw every punch in the book and defensively he was the best fighter p4p at the time.They didn't call him the old master for nothing and he might even benefit from stricter refereeing.

When he first won the title he had some 120 wins and only a handful of losses including a suspect loss to ATG Terry McGovern and a loss to ATG Sam Langford.

The abilities and accomplishments that Gans has permits me from giving Floyd more than a 50% chance of winning a 12 rounder. If I have to pick I take Gans.

Do you even train or fight as a boxer? What would you know about the benefits of different types of training?

I have trained first off in a very old school style when I began fighting, lots of long, long roadwork, very old school defensive techniques like the cross arm defence, flat footed shuffling footwork, very slow paced fighting, lots of in close fighting, long periods just hitting the heavybag at a slow pace etc

(eg: how they trained 100 years ago)

And guess what? I got iced by dudes that trained in the new school, lots of sprint training, intense, short rounds on the bag, better schooled technique, faster footwork, etc (eg: how they train nowadays)

Some aspects of old school technique are good, if you combine it with modern day conditioning like a guy like Toney does, but training exclusively old school does not cut it against a well trained modern fighter....

And guess what happened when I started training in the modern school? Yeah that's right, I went on a winning streak and won some titles.

It's on a much smaller scale than guys like Gans and Floyd, but it still applies.

[Southpaw16BF]

Do you even train or fight as a boxer? What would you know about the benefits of different types of training?

I have trained first off in a very old school style when I began fighting, lots of long, long roadwork, very old school defensive techniques like the cross arm defence, flat footed shuffling footwork, very slow paced fighting, lots of in close fighting, long periods just hitting the heavybag at a slow pace etc

(eg: how they trained 100 years ago)

And guess what? I got iced by dudes that trained in the new school, lots of sprint training, intense, short rounds on the bag, better schooled technique, faster footwork, etc (eg: how they train nowadays)

Some aspects of old school technique are good, if you combine it with modern day conditioning like a guy like Toney does, but training exclusively old school does not cut it against a well trained modern fighter....

And guess what happened when I started training in the modern school? Yeah that's right, I went on a winning streak and won some titles.

It's on a much smaller scale than guys like Gans and Floyd, but it still applies.

No offence. But you have far to much to say. You come on here, and act like because you've boxed you know everything. No offence, I watced you shadowboxing, and you looked like a novice Muay Thai fighter who didnt know what he was doing.

You always call old school fighters and call there training methods etc. But you have no right to, because no offence you have achieved nothing in boxing.

Battling Nelson is a good poster, who knows about the history of the sport. Show him some respect. And stop trying to be a know it all.

[Suckmedry]

No offence. But you have far to much to say. You come on here, and act like because you've boxed you know everything. No offence, I watced you shadowboxing, and you looked like a novice Muay Thai fighter who didnt know what he was doing.

You always call old school fighters and call there training methods etc. But you have no right to, because no offence you have achieved nothing in boxing.

Battling Nelson is a good poster, who knows about the history of the sport. Show him some respect. And stop trying to be a know it all.

A novice Muay Thai fighter The video was not my best as I was not training at the time, but I did not look like a Muay Thai fighter, that is ridiculous. An it shows how little you know.

What have you achieved in boxing? I'm an Aussie GG champ, a state champ and have been to national titles x2 with one silver medal. And I'm really only in the infancy of my career. I'm not a top line fighter yet but I know what I'm talking about when it comes to training and fighting.

Just because I'm not obsessed with old school boxing and can see that modern training has improved on many things, doesn't mean you have the right to tell me I don't know what I am talking about.

And on the other hand, I'm not a modern fighter nuthugger either, I look at it all objectively.

[GJC]

I have trained first off in a very old school style when I began fighting, lots of long, long roadwork, very old school defensive techniques like the cross arm defence, flat footed shuffling footwork, very slow paced fighting, lots of in close fighting, long periods just hitting the heavybag at a slow pace etc

(eg: how they trained 100 years ago)

And guess what? I got iced by dudes that trained in the new school, lots of sprint training, intense, short rounds on the bag, better schooled technique, faster footwork, etc (eg: how they train nowadays)

Did you find you learnt a lot in actual fights?
i.e. One actual round of boxing is = to 50 rounds sparring or something like that?

[Obama]

Modern training techniques clearly favor shorter fights (which ARE shorter today). This much should be obvious simply due to the logic behind training. You train for the longest possible fight you might partake in. A guy training to go 20 is going to change his tactics if the most he has to go is 12.

Counter right has some good points here. You don't need to be a boxing historian to know this stuff.

[Suckmedry]

Did you find you learnt a lot in actual fights?
i.e. One actual round of boxing is = to 50 rounds sparring or something like that?

Yeah, definitely. One fight is equal to like 6 months in the gym, maybe more valuable.

[GJC]

Yeah, definitely. One fight is equal to like 6 months in the gym, maybe more valuable.

Gans had 150 odd fights so that was a lot of his training
It is difficult to compare these things it's a bit like trying to compare who out of a 200 metre runner and a marathon runner would win a mile race.

[Obama]

Yeah, definitely. One fight is equal to like 6 months in the gym, maybe more valuable.

Depends how good your sparring partners are and how intense the sparring is. Definitely learned more in some of my sparring sessions as opposed to competing against a few guys.

Competition adds a different kind of learning imo. Seems like you've got all the time to think in the world when you're sparring. No time to think when it's the real thing.

One is like reading music (which is not necessarily an easy thing to do, depending on the piece). The other is improvisation. You read the music a bunch of times in the past, you pretty much have it remembered, but whatever you forget you just wing and make the best of it.