Are Today's Fighters Better than Fighters From The Past? Hell Yes

[aus box]

it is not unreasonable to think boxers of today as a collective group are better then the old days why u will always have individuals who would peform well in any era as a whole boxers of today are better
boxing being the sport it is its hard to tell but wen u look at 100m sprint times, long jump records etc. infact every single event in the whole olympics has been bettered since back in the day so why is it impossible to say boxers havnt got better even tho those events mentioned have nothing to do with boxing it proves human beings as a general rule are bettering themselves

boxing also is just one of those sports where are lot of ppl have been brought up to believe a certain fighter was the best and its all u get told for years so u believe it to be gospil (it cant be wrong grandpa joe told me all these stories about himwen lets be honest no1 in this forum was alive to see henry armstrong fight but ppl will bag others for comparing pac with him and vitali(tho i do hate him) can achieve everything in the book but dont dare compare him to an oldie. and its sad coz its textbook definition of bias

[frankenfrank]

evolution dosnt work like that. you see the genes that you pass on are the same genes your born with and any advancements to your body you make through out your life via hard work has absloutly no influence on what you pass on to your children as the only thing you pass on is the same exact thing you had when you were born and what you tell them.

the 3rd generation may be better but only because its had 2 previous generations of learning to pass on to it, nothing to do with evolution.

He meant the evolution of knowledge . Experience and technique evolved since then significantly , same for training methods , weight cutting methods , dieting and nutrition , all of these things have evolved significantly since then.
Also the rules changed .
While there were great fighters in the past , the main reason to why the shined so bright is because the average fighter was lesser back then at almost every aspect and for one who had some knowledge about these things it was much less competitive to become dominant.
Today when the knowledge is much more accessible and abundant it is easier for more to get to sufficient professional level .

[TheMagicMan]

it is not unreasonable to think boxers of today as a collective group are better then the old days why u will always have individuals who would peform well in any era as a whole boxers of today are better
boxing being the sport it is its hard to tell but wen u look at 100m sprint times, long jump records etc. infact every single event in the whole olympics has been bettered since back in the day so why is it impossible to say boxers havnt got better even tho those events mentioned have nothing to do with boxing it proves human beings as a general rule are bettering themselves

boxing also is just one of those sports where are lot of ppl have been brought up to believe a certain fighter was the best and its all u get told for years so u believe it to be gospil (it cant be wrong grandpa joe told me all these stories about himwen lets be honest no1 in this forum was alive to see henry armstrong fight but ppl will bag others for comparing pac with him and vitali(tho i do hate him) can achieve everything in the book but dont dare compare him to an oldie. and its sad coz its textbook definition of bias

It is, here is the simple truth. Every olympic record has been beat. The only records that havent been beat such as a lot of lifting records, come from tales about as substantiated as Big Foot stories. Fact is even in events that have lost favor over the years, javelin/hammerthrow and Pole Vault, which all arent even available in most states track and field programs, Americans still destroy old American records, even from back when those were staples of the sporting world.

[boxing boy]

The late Jimmy Jacobs, then the owner of the world's largest fight film collection, once measured Ali's jab by an omegascope. He found that Sugar Ray Robinson's jab took 8.5 frames of film. Ali's took only 6.5!! Faster than the fastest middleweights!!

Why haven't the modern heavyweights evolved with faster speed?

They surely should have some heavyweights faster than the fastest middleweights? Like Muhammad Ali.

[Spartacus Sully]

The late Jimmy Jacobs, then the owner of the world's largest fight film collection, once measured Ali's jab by an omegascope. He found that Sugar Ray Robinson's jab took 8.5 frames of film. Ali's took only 6.5!! Faster than the fastest middleweights!!

Why haven't the modern heavyweights evolved with faster speed?

They surely should have some heavyweights faster than the fastest middleweights? Like Muhammad Ali.

sugar rays jab was a left straight alis jab was a jab.

[boxing boy]

sugar rays jab was a left straight alis jab was a jab.

Have today's heavyweights jabs evolved faster than Ali's?

Of course there footspeed is alot faster too! It's evolution,Lol

Did Muhammad Ali's speed evolve 100 years ahead of time?

[Spartacus Sully]

Have today's heavyweights jabs evolved faster than Ali's?

Of course there footspeed is alot faster too! It's evolution,Lol

Did Muhammad Ali's speed evolve 100 years ahead of time?

no. the jab changed.

going from a whirled shoulder left straight to a jab is going to take seconds off the time.

No human beings evolved in this process only the sport of boxing....assuming your ****** enough to think that the jab can completely replace the left straight.

and todays heavy weights dont have faster jabs then ali's.

[boxing boy]

no. the jab changed.

going from a whirled shoulder left straight to a jab is going to take seconds off the time.

No human beings evolved in this process only the sport of boxing....assuming your ****** enough to think that the jab can completely replace the left straight.

and todays heavy weights dont have faster jabs then ali's.

Your right,today's heavyweights don't have faster jabs then Ali's.

There "reflexes" are not as fast as Prime Muhammad Ali's either.

Nor there footspeed.

BTW-There are smart fighters and dumb fighters,and anywhere in between.This cannot evolve either,and Prime Muhammad Ali was a very smart fighter.

[Spartacus Sully]

Your right,today's heavyweights don't have faster jabs then Ali's.

There "reflexes" are not as fast as Prime Muhammad Ali's either.

Nor there footspeed.

BTW-There are smart fighters and dumb fighters,and anywhere in between.This cannot evolve either,and Prime Muhammad Ali was a very smart fighter.

ohhh i see there was sarcasm some where there.

I was just defending sugar ray in that his jab traded off the speed for power.

[SplitSecond]

Your right,today's heavyweights don't have faster jabs then Ali's.

There "reflexes" are not as fast as Prime Muhammad Ali's either.

Nor there footspeed.

BTW-There are smart fighters and dumb fighters,and anywhere in between.This cannot evolve either,and Prime Muhammad Ali was a very smart fighter.

lets ignore the fact that ali was virtually a cruiserweight as nowadays most heavyweights ar 250-300

and david haye is the same height but weighs more than ali for fights and he's just as fast as ali.
probabley more so in reflexes