Can someone explain to me how boxing has "evolved" since the middle the last century

[Bundana]

- - Could it be the US male population has the lowest % of boxers today compared to yesteryear when it was either boxing, baseball, factory, farm or politics?

I say yea!

You are undoubtedly correct!

The number of active US boxers today is but a very small fraction, of what it used to be "back in the day".

There's nowhere on BoxRec, where we can find the actual numbers of active boxers in individual countries, for specific years. However, we can find the number of promotions, for individual years:
1930: 7707 US promotions
1950: 1986 US Promotions
2018: 596 US promotions

In other words, an enormous slump in US boxing activity since the busy depression years - which probably doesn't surprise anyone!

[DooGee#33]

So it's more or less common knowledge, that there are far, far fewer active boxers today, than back in the 50s?

I'm talking about thread topic overall. The myth of advancing skills.

There are good fighters today, a few great ones. If we can't even get the current Belrholders to fight each other often enough how can the claim of advancing skills be taken seriously?

If a young fan today doesn't have anythimg to compare it to then he doesnt know whar he doesnt know.

To a young fan Ryan Garcia was ready for a world championship fight. He looked good hitting the mitts. Was he a seasoned pro? He's a novice boxer witn some potential that he won't reach because he doesn't have to.

The general sports fan already handed down the verdict. They could care less about boxing today.

[Bundana]

I'm talking about thread topic overall. The myth of advancing skills.

There are good fighters today, a few great ones. If we can't even get the current Belrholders to fight each other often enough how can the claim of advancing skills be taken seriously?

If a young fan today doesn't have anythimg to compare it to then he doesnt know whar he doesnt know.

To a young fan Ryan Garcia was ready for a world championship fight. He looked good hitting the mitts. Was he a seasoned pro? He's a novice boxer witn some potential that he won't reach because he doesn't have to.

The general sports fan already handed down the verdict. They could care less about boxing today.

The question was whether or not there are fewer active boxers today than back in the 50s. It's a factual question, that has nothing to do with opinion, skills-myth, or how bad today's fighters are, compared to the old-timers. Why can't you address a simple question like that?

[them_apples]

I'm talking about thread topic overall. The myth of advancing skills.

There are good fighters today, a few great ones. If we can't even get the current Belrholders to fight each other often enough how can the claim of advancing skills be taken seriously?

If a young fan today doesn't have anythimg to compare it to then he doesnt know whar he doesnt know.

To a young fan Ryan Garcia was ready for a world championship fight. He looked good hitting the mitts. Was he a seasoned pro? He's a novice boxer witn some potential that he won't reach because he doesn't have to.

The general sports fan already handed down the verdict. They could care less about boxing today.

Did Duran and Garcia fight for the same title? If they did isn’t that absurd. The level gap is literally enormous. Duran could knock 3 garcias out in one night.

[them_apples]

Because I'm just not seeing it.

Fighters in the "old days":
-Sparred
-Did roadwork
-Hit the heavy bag, speed bag, and double-end bag
-Eat right

Modern fighters:
-Spar
-Do roadwork
-Hit the heavy bag, speed bag, and double-end bag
-Eat right, as much as is possible given that most foods are processed or covered with chemicals
-Some weight training

The only ones who think it has evolved for the better:

1: are new
2: don’t know much about boxing and rely on their eyes
3: have never actually boxed themselves or have any understanding of it
4: determine a fighters “skills� based on their training sessions, which is a new thing created by Floyd for the media.

don’t get me wrong there was always media days, but it never overshadowed the actual requirement to be a good fighter.

[markusmod]

The only ones who think it has evolved for the better:

1: are new
2: donât know much about boxing and rely on their eyes
3: have never actually boxed themselves or have any understanding of it
4: determine a fighters âskillsâ based on their training sessions, which is a new thing created by Floyd for the media.

donât get me wrong there was always media days, but it never overshadowed the actual requirement to be a good fighter.

I feel that a lot of boxers fight in that Mayweather type style and it works fo rthem - Stevenson, Keyshawn, Haney.

[Slugfester]

Willie Pep was as advanced as any viewable boxer of the last 100 years. Neophytes need to watch him to see the origin of some of Mayweather's moves.

[Bundana]

Willie Pep was as advanced as any viewable boxer of the last 100 years. Neophytes need to watch him to see the origin of some of Mayweather's moves.

I agree.

Since the late 30s (Louis) and early 40s (Pep, Robinson), I don't really see any significant evolvement/improvement when it comes to boxing ability/skills.

That being said, I don't se any devolvement over the last several decades either - you know, to the point where today's boxers have turned into clueless sissies, who wouldn't be able to "hang" with the old-timers. That's just plain silly!

[Willow The Wisp]

I'm talking about thread topic overall. The myth of advancing skills.

There are good fighters today, a few great ones. If we can't even get the current Belrholders to fight each other often enough how can the claim of advancing skills be taken seriously?

If a young fan today doesn't have anythimg to compare it to then he doesnt know whar he doesnt know.

To a young fan Ryan Garcia was ready for a world championship fight. He looked good hitting the mitts. Was he a seasoned pro? He's a novice boxer witn some potential that he won't reach because he doesn't have to.

The general sports fan already handed down the verdict. They could care less about boxing today.

That last line is total BS.
Boxing has always been an international sport. The very first one. It has produced as many internationally famous athletes as any other sport. Today, Only Professional Soccer exceeds boxing in terms of statistical international spread, and Boxing exceeds soccer, as a followed professional sport in the US and China. Baseball, American Football, and (largely, though to a lesser extent) Basketball are US based. Cricket and Rugby are limited to the commonwealth, when assessing spread. MMA/UFC generates only a fraction of the interest.

All this is easily searched.

[QueensburyRules]

That last line is total BS.
Boxing has always been an international sport. The very first one. It has produced as many internationally famous athletes as any other sport. Today, Only Professional Soccer exceeds boxing in terms of statistical international spread, and Boxing exceeds soccer, as a followed professional sport in the US and China. Baseball, American Football, and (largely, though to a lesser extent) Basketball are US based. Cricket and Rugby are limited to the commonwealth, when assessing spread. MMA/UFC generates only a fraction of the interest.

All this is easily searched.

- - Basketball huge in Europe and China, combined with the US they dwarf boxing...duh...