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

[TheMagicMan]

Dream on little boy! When you move up from jobs that use the phrase "You want fries with that?" you can talk about owning something. As for insulting you, why in the hell would I bother trying to have an intelligent adult conversation with someone who's balls haven't dropped yet and clearly knows **** all about boxing? I save the intellectual discourse for those worthy of it, not prepubescent children. The point is you don't belong trolling in this section and when you do I'm going to respond in a way that's appropriate to you. You wouldn't hear boo from me (nor would you be on my douche list) if you were posting in NSB where your nuthugging ******ed **** belongs :hand9:

Poet

Again, name calling. The biggest troll act is to make assumptions about who is posting. Especially based on age. You have no clue how old I am or how educated I am. I dont care that I am young and sexy and educated and you are old and dirty and most likely have been ******ed/are a ******or. Quick question how many times have you been ******ed and have you ******ed someone. They say **** sex is a lot like spinache, if youre forced to have it as a kid, youll love it as an adult. So I dont blame you for your activities. I just want you to get the help you need. Making angry insults on a message board...thats no way to live out your old age. Suicide is an option, a very viable one. You should check into it.

You post an article thats sole argument is that less people are boxing today, however, the only proof of that assertion is that "There are fewer boxing events in New York City." Thats not proof. Thats like saying "Football isnt as popular today as it was in the early 90's because there are no teams in LA and back then there were 2."

I get it, youre old and it sucks and youre living onto the past. So is the writer in your threads. Hes so dumb he cant even argue why the 60's-70's would be good udner his own logic when boxing in the U.S. was on the decline and like 30k american men between 18-26 were wounded or killed in Vietnam. Oh and pro football and basketbal were groing at unprecedented rates, and drug use was at historic highs, oh and half the world couldnt compete, but thats the height right there? Under his logic that should be the worst time of all.

I own you.

[StarshipTrooper]

You'll have to better than that if you want to TRY and insult me! :rofl9: Seriously! You need to come up with some material of your own instead of recycling insults that have been tried and found wanting many times before :hahahaha9: Did I strike a nerve when I exposed your occupation? And what's up with calling yourself "sexy"? :gay: Are you auditioning for a spot in The Village People or something? :gay:

Poet

[SBleeder]

The average club fighter would beat Dempsey or Johnson. Any hw in the top 15 right now would wax Ali.

Thanks, I needed a laugh.

[TheMagicMan]

You'll have to better than that if you want to TRY and insult me! :rofl9: Seriously! You need to come up with some material of your own instead of recycling insults that have been tried and found wanting many times before :hahahaha9: Did I strike a nerve when I exposed your occupation? And what's up with calling yourself "sexy"? :gay: Are you auditioning for a spot in The Village People or something? :gay:

Poet

I am sexy, im a lawyer and a financial advisor and I can prove it with a multitude of websites, and you can see my pictures and ********** to them. Making village people references, calling people gay...really original. I want to see your picture, your grotesque, fat, old, ugly self. I can just tell youre ugly. Me, im sexy, you youre ugly. Youre probably going to die soon and no one will care.

[Megamasterking]

read and learn !

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.

First i dont want to put you down but there are things you need to know.Why do i know more things then you on boxing ? It is because im a boxer and the people that were in gym with me at that time were OLD enough to witness the performance of great fighters like Suger ray Robinson and even Joe Louis ! Those people have been around the world boxing and also meeting legends like Ali, Marciano, Robinson they have gloves signed by them and pictures with them. They have trained world champions, now do you think you know better then they do ? If you think you know better stop reading now and:wank: if you think they can teach you then read and learn. I started boxing in the 80s and frequently i had discussion with those experts about how good was Ali and the others, the fact that some people are bigger and faster now have nothing to do with it. The fact is that those Legends where not the average Joe and to put it simple if Ali was in is prime today in 2010 he would still make circles around those big guy just like he use to do in the past. Just for fun have you ever heard of Louis Cyr, he was born in 1863 and he could lift 553 pounds with 1 finger go ask your friends to do that or even better go in the gym and ask anybody to do that, i can tell you right now that they wont do it. So, some people are born with great skills and it has nothing to do with the year that they were born. The average club fighter would be killed by those Legends, the proof is that i use to beat them badly and im far from being a Legend...

[TheGreatA]

I don't see why anyone would waste their time having an argument with TheMagicMan. He's not looking for a sensible discussion.

[TheMagicMan]

First i dont want to put you down but there are things you need to know.Why do i know more things then you on boxing ? It is because im a boxer and the people that were in gym with me at that time were OLD enough to witness the performance of great fighters like Suger ray Robinson and even Joe Louis ! Those people have been around the world boxing and also meeting legends like Ali, Marciano, Robinson they have gloves signed by them and pictures with them. They have trained world champions, now do you think you know better then they do ? If you think you know better stop reading now and:wank: if you think they can teach you then read and learn. I started boxing in the 80s and frequently i had discussion with those experts about how good was Ali and the others, the fact that some people are bigger and faster now have nothing to do with it. The fact is that those Legends where not the average Joe and to put it simple if Ali was in is prime today in 2010 he would still make circles around those big guy just like he use to do in the past. Just for fun have you ever heard of Louis Cyr, he was born in 1863 and he could lift 553 pounds with 1 finger go ask your friends to do that or even better go in the gym and ask anybody to do that, i can tell you right now that they wont do it. So, some people are born with great skills and it has nothing to do with the year that they were born. The average club fighter would be killed by those Legends, the proof is that use to beat them badly myself and im far from being a Legend...

YOu do realize Louis Cyr worked in a circus right? A circus....ok, guess what I saw Mark Henry lift a semi over his head on WWE. Youre a ****ing ******, seriously, you sound ******ed. Im not even joking, im not trying to be mean, but your thought process is ******ed. If English is your first language, kill yourself. You dont deserve to live. Im really hoping youre a french canadian who learned English in night school or something, because to reiterate, you sound ****ing ******ed. I mean, let me break down your post for you into what someone who speaks English would translate it as.

Your thesis:
I know more than you because I boxed (and I didnt/dont? ok...but we get it you boxed...I did too)

There were people in your gym who were old enough to watch SRR and Ali (again ****ing ******ed, 80% of Americans witnessed them, 1980 aint that long ago)

I started boxing in the 80's and spoke to these people (so you know more because you spoke to people who saw Ali...back in the 80s...which has ****ing nothing to do with right now. How could someone in the 80's talk about VITALI ****ING KLiTSCHKO YOU DUMB ****)

Just because people are bigger and faster today has nothing to do with it (really? hmm...cause that would seem to have a lot to do with it)

Ali would dance circles around people today (again your train of thought is lost. What the **** does talking to some old guy 5 years after Ali retired have anything to do with gaining knowledge about fighters today?)

Its like saying, "I talked to an employee of microsoft in 1985. He told me that Windows is awesome and beats mac OS's. Therefore the first version of windows would trounce any Mac today."

Then you ask me if I know about a circus performer/strongman. First of all in the lifting community all those old records like Andersons are considered to be a joke. There were no judges, sketchy reporting, no witnesees etc...Cyr is 10x worse than Anderson. There are reports of him doing things that are physically impossible, like matter wise. But thats beyond the point. The point is for you to stop typing.

Give it up youre either 1. insane 2. Not fluent in English. or 3. ******ed. Either way you dont belong here.

[Megamasterking]

YOu do realize Louis Cyr worked in a circus right? A circus....ok, guess what I saw Mark Henry lift a semi over his head on WWE. Youre a ****ing ******, seriously, you sound ******ed. Im not even joking, im not trying to be mean, but your thought process is ******ed. If English is your first language, kill yourself. You dont deserve to live. Im really hoping youre a french canadian who learned English in night school or something, because to reiterate, you sound ****ing ******ed. I mean, let me break down your post for you into what someone who speaks English would translate it as.

Your thesis:
I know more than you because I boxed (and I didnt/dont? ok...but we get it you boxed...I did too)

There were people in your gym who were old enough to watch SRR and Ali (again ****ing ******ed, 80% of Americans witnessed them, 1980 aint that long ago)

I started boxing in the 80's and spoke to these people (so you know more because you spoke to people who saw Ali...back in the 80s...which has ****ing nothing to do with right now. How could someone in the 80's talk about VITALI ****ING KLiTSCHKO YOU DUMB ****)

Just because people are bigger and faster today has nothing to do with it (really? hmm...cause that would seem to have a lot to do with it)

Ali would dance circles around people today (again your train of thought is lost. What the **** does talking to some old guy 5 years after Ali retired have anything to do with gaining knowledge about fighters today?)

Its like saying, "I talked to an employee of microsoft in 1985. He told me that Windows is awesome and beats mac OS's. Therefore the first version of windows would trounce any Mac today."

Then you ask me if I know about a circus performer/strongman. First of all in the lifting community all those old records like Andersons are considered to be a joke. There were no judges, sketchy reporting, no witnesees etc...Cyr is 10x worse than Anderson. There are reports of him doing things that are physically impossible, like matter wise. But thats beyond the point. The point is for you to stop typing.

Give it up youre either 1. insane 2. Not fluent in English. or 3. ******ed. Either way you dont belong here.

Your right on 1 thing, i speak French but my english is better then your French Now i know why people think your a *******

[them_apples]

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.

The only real thing I hate is when an opponents quantity of wins is used to determine how good he was. That's just childish to me.

Like for Ali, he was good, he fought incredible competition.

But using Robinsons 200+ fights as a reason to determine p4p greatness is a joke. Line up 100 Joes or even average fighters to a guy like Leonard or Pacquiao, and you have the same outcome.

[BigStereotype]

How is it possible that Joe Calzaghe beat RJJ, Who Beat Ruiz, Who Beat Holyfield, Who Beat HOlmes Who beat Ali? Joe Calzaghe clearly who beat the hell out of Ali then. You heard it here first, Joe Calzaghe, greatest HW of all

How many of those wins were prime? Or even remotely close to prime?