Tweet
I wanted to comment on the ******ity of the article being spammed on this board, unfortunately I am on the posters ignore list. Seriously, who has an ignore list? It just shows willful ignorance. What? He doesnt agree with me? IGNORE!. Coward. Anyways, here is why the article is dumb. It makes assertions that because there were more boxing shows in NYC in the 1900's than today, that back in the 1900's fighters could beat the fighters today....
Under that logic, there were more pro baseball teams in New york during the early 20th century than today, so baseball must have been bigger back then and baseball players were better. However, we can analyze players speed, speed of pitches, average distance of hits etc...from video and tell that the players playing at the time of the earliest recordings, were nowhere close to the players today.
The whole post is idiotic, it also doesnt say how many people are boxing in NYC, or practice boxing, it just says how many shows there are. If it had numbers like, back in 1910 there were an estimated 800,000 people who called themselves boxers living in NYC, today there are a mere 400,000...then it could make an argument, but it doesnt do that. Its argument would still suck, because NYC does not equal the world. In order to make a claim that more people were fighting back then as opposed to today theyd have to add up the whole world, which they dont do. They dont mention the Eastern Euro's the Africans, the Pacific Islanders, nope, the world according to this article is NYC. And I disagree with the whole "numbers" thing and feel there are more factors.
Want to know the quick reason why there are less shows in NYC. Its called tv. Back then there was nothing to do, so they needed live entertainment, also live entertainment suffered if it wasnt in NYC. So everything was in NYC and everything was live entertainment. Now people have tv. They dont go out as much and fights dont have to be in the center of the world.
I also think its hilarious the people supporting this article are Ali fans. According to the article the 60's and 70's should be the worst time for boxing. The world was split in two, which halves the whole pool of fighters, then in the U.S. 15k men who could have been boxers were killed in vietnam, others wounded, others wasted the prime years. NFL and BBall were growing in popularity at record numbers. So if you want to argue that the 60's and 70's were the worst era for boxing, go right ahead.
Also the article fails to mention nutrition, just brings up steroids. The average person lives over a decade longer now than at "boxings prime". Fighters can recover from injuries with medical technology. They no longer implement leaches in medical procedures. People understand protiens, and creatine, and vitamins. They understand the value of certain legal supplements as wel as hydration. Technology has improved, training equipment is much better and you can be scientific. You can also watch and breakdown film, not just your opponents, but yourself (which would be even more important).
People on average are taller and bigger now. Its from being healthier. Also many sports have fallen by the wayside, but yet people still break records in events like the polevault (now banned in many U.S. schools) and the hammer throw.
The whole fighters were better in the past is ridiculous. The average club fighter would beat Dempsey or Johnson. Any hw in the top 15 right now would wax Ali.
Under that logic, there were more pro baseball teams in New york during the early 20th century than today, so baseball must have been bigger back then and baseball players were better. However, we can analyze players speed, speed of pitches, average distance of hits etc...from video and tell that the players playing at the time of the earliest recordings, were nowhere close to the players today.
The whole post is idiotic, it also doesnt say how many people are boxing in NYC, or practice boxing, it just says how many shows there are. If it had numbers like, back in 1910 there were an estimated 800,000 people who called themselves boxers living in NYC, today there are a mere 400,000...then it could make an argument, but it doesnt do that. Its argument would still suck, because NYC does not equal the world. In order to make a claim that more people were fighting back then as opposed to today theyd have to add up the whole world, which they dont do. They dont mention the Eastern Euro's the Africans, the Pacific Islanders, nope, the world according to this article is NYC. And I disagree with the whole "numbers" thing and feel there are more factors.
Want to know the quick reason why there are less shows in NYC. Its called tv. Back then there was nothing to do, so they needed live entertainment, also live entertainment suffered if it wasnt in NYC. So everything was in NYC and everything was live entertainment. Now people have tv. They dont go out as much and fights dont have to be in the center of the world.
I also think its hilarious the people supporting this article are Ali fans. According to the article the 60's and 70's should be the worst time for boxing. The world was split in two, which halves the whole pool of fighters, then in the U.S. 15k men who could have been boxers were killed in vietnam, others wounded, others wasted the prime years. NFL and BBall were growing in popularity at record numbers. So if you want to argue that the 60's and 70's were the worst era for boxing, go right ahead.
Also the article fails to mention nutrition, just brings up steroids. The average person lives over a decade longer now than at "boxings prime". Fighters can recover from injuries with medical technology. They no longer implement leaches in medical procedures. People understand protiens, and creatine, and vitamins. They understand the value of certain legal supplements as wel as hydration. Technology has improved, training equipment is much better and you can be scientific. You can also watch and breakdown film, not just your opponents, but yourself (which would be even more important).
People on average are taller and bigger now. Its from being healthier. Also many sports have fallen by the wayside, but yet people still break records in events like the polevault (now banned in many U.S. schools) and the hammer throw.
The whole fighters were better in the past is ridiculous. The average club fighter would beat Dempsey or Johnson. Any hw in the top 15 right now would wax Ali.
Comment