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

[QueensburyRules]

I'll tell ya how - moved off TV networks and now on streaming platforms.

- - Thanks to DKings blatant fixed farces.

Usual idjits moan about how good his cards were when KING coopting most of the purses for he and KingJr.

Speakinf of, he who dropped off the boxing charts to live a life of wh0ring dissolution.

[them_apples]

The word is things evolve over time, given they are practiced, researched and improved upon, and all the remaining factors/rules stay relatively the same.

This couldn’t be further from reality though, because very rarely is that ACTUALLY practiced.

Boxing has changed so much behind the scenes that it is impossible to say it has been actively built upon over the course of 200 years.

- Gloves have changed
- amateur fights have changed (drastically)
- the number of fights you can have has changed
- marketing has changed
- lifestyles have changed / upbringing
- the density of where fights are taking place has changed (most fights were in America the farther back you go) it was prize fighting after all
- rules have changed, fights are shorter, and stopped sooner
- being undefeated matters so much now, fighters will pad their records forever

The misconception comes from watching sports like basketball or Hockey and noticing that they seem to have improved with time. However these sports aren’t very old. Anything will improve drastically if you are starting from infancy. Boxing is about 200 years old professionally, but likely had a lot more going on before that as well. Even 3-400 years of study isn’t out of the question.

The reality is society has changed. The way we grew up has changed. Our ancestors grew up in a world were violence was applauded. Being hard as nails was the ultimate virtue. Life was harder. Jobs were harder. This trickles into every category of boxing. The trainers were serious. There weren’t any distractions.

most of all FILM footage has improved. I hate to insult anyone, but judging the quality of one fighter isn’t fair when one was filmed on 12 fps and the other at 60 fps, and the camera is only a few meters away.

SKILL: the typical fan doesn’t know what skill is, how would they?? Skill would refer to the best methods for fighting. The typical fan associates the best Defense with “keeping your hands up”. This couldn’t be further from the truth for example. Skill can be fighting your opponent in close and smothering him, crouching very low against a taller fighter making it impossible for him to hit you, throwing your jab straight, smooth and unteleg****d. Making as few steps as possible to get into position with your feet, even setting a pace that the opponent can’t maintain. Many skills you won’t even SEE unless pointed out. Skills aren’t just holding your hands in a philly shell position (with no apparent idea how it works). Skill can even be Holding a particular angle against an opponent that simply doesn’t give them anything to hit. That’s real smart Defense. Who could see it though unless pointed out?

The trainers today are BAD. They don’t study the tapes, they claim they do but not really. Trainers are like your typical person today, lazy, distracted and undedicated. We know this from the clout some trainers get on social media. Look at Errol Spence style, just totally unschooled in the form of professional fighting. That was his trainers fault, not his.

The list could go on and on but what’s the point?

Believe it or not, the older the Olympic sport, the less the records get broken - and even when they do its almost always a combination of changing the rules or equipment - or just natural selection in finding a more suitable athlete. It doesn’t mean athlete evolved as a whole.

Are propeller based monoplanes better than they were in 1945? Absolutely not. Because jets replaced them (the rules changed). A spitfire mk4 would run circles around any monoplane today. What monoplane can reach speeds of 500 mph?

If you gave a bunch of marines Bayonets, do you think they could deal with some legionaires trained to fight in formation? No it would be a massacre (the rules changed).

The average pro today has 100’s of Amy fights - fighting in a style based on points, foam gloves, short rounds, head gear and less rounds. The style required to succeed in this is not a style suited for 15 round professional bouts with 8 oz Cleto reyes. No, a single punch can take you out under these conditions. When a fighter goes pro, he can’t change his style after fighting one way for so long.

Boxrec can’t give you accurate figures on active fighters of the past because smaller venues weren’t even documented. People fought all the time. Club fights were a side hustle. Even in the 70’s it was common for professional fighters in Mexico to fight pro, then rack up a few more dollars fighting at pubs (sometimes bare knuckle) in unsanctioned bouts, often a few a night even. I can confirm Carlos zarate did this.

The game has changed completely. In so many ways.

So has boxing evolved? If we are talking who beats who then the answer is NO. A hard NO. So much has been lost because the style is completely different. They fight like amateurs now, with a few standouts obviously. If the evolution is talking about changes then yes it has evolved. Fighters get paid more, take less damage, fight less and get title shots sooner and easier. Rehydration clauses allows fighters to come in heavier - which may or may not be beneficial. In the event where the extra weight gives them an advantage though (Which I suspect it really doesn’t) then simply match them with a lower weight class to be fair. If you think Marciano is too small (It wouldn’t matter, but some people refute this) then match Marciano against cruiserweights.

Lastly, there are 4 titles per weight class and twice as many weight classes as before. That’s 5x (even more) the amount of world titles floating around. This makes Floyds claim that he beat the most world champions completely void. That’s just one example of many.

[Slugfester]

Try typing without apostrophes, and you won�t get this.

[Willie Pep 229]

Try typing without apostrophes, and you won�t get this.

Maybe it is which language his keyboard is set to.

You're right it is some computer reaction to the apostrophes, or the absence thereof.

When I leave out an apostrophe I just get a blank spot.

I can t wait!

[Bundana]

The word is things evolve over time, given they are practiced, researched and improved upon, and all the remaining factors/rules stay relatively the same.

This couldn�t be further from reality though, because very rarely is that ACTUALLY practiced.

Boxing has changed so much behind the scenes that it is impossible to say it has been actively built upon over the course of 200 years.

- Gloves have changed
- amateur fights have changed (drastically)
- the number of fights you can have has changed
- marketing has changed
- lifestyles have changed / upbringing
- the density of where fights are taking place has changed (most fights were in America the farther back you go) it was prize fighting after all
- rules have changed, fights are shorter, and stopped sooner
- being undefeated matters so much now, fighters will pad their records forever

The misconception comes from watching sports like basketball or Hockey and noticing that they seem to have improved with time. However these sports aren�t very old. Anything will improve drastically if you are starting from infancy. Boxing is about 200 years old professionally, but likely had a lot more going on before that as well. Even 3-400 years of study isn�t out of the question.

The reality is society has changed. The way we grew up has changed. Our ancestors grew up in a world were violence was applauded. Being hard as nails was the ultimate virtue. Life was harder. Jobs were harder. This trickles into every category of boxing. The trainers were serious. There weren�t any distractions.

most of all FILM footage has improved. I hate to insult anyone, but judging the quality of one fighter isn�t fair when one was filmed on 12 fps and the other at 60 fps, and the camera is only a few meters away.

SKILL: the typical fan doesn�t know what skill is, how would they?? Skill would refer to the best methods for fighting. The typical fan associates the best Defense with �keeping your hands up�. This couldn�t be further from the truth for example. Skill can be fighting your opponent in close and smothering him, crouching very low against a taller fighter making it impossible for him to hit you, throwing your jab straight, smooth and unteleg****d. Making as few steps as possible to get into position with your feet, even setting a pace that the opponent can�t maintain. Many skills you won�t even SEE unless pointed out. Skills aren�t just holding your hands in a philly shell position (with no apparent idea how it works). Skill can even be Holding a particular angle against an opponent that simply doesn�t give them anything to hit. That�s real smart Defense. Who could see it though unless pointed out?

The trainers today are BAD. They don�t study the tapes, they claim they do but not really. Trainers are like your typical person today, lazy, distracted and undedicated. We know this from the clout some trainers get on social media. Look at Errol Spence style, just totally unschooled in the form of professional fighting. That was his trainers fault, not his.

The list could go on and on but what�s the point?

Believe it or not, the older the Olympic sport, the less the records get broken - and even when they do its almost always a combination of changing the rules or equipment - or just natural selection in finding a more suitable athlete. It doesn�t mean athlete evolved as a whole.

Are propeller based monoplanes better than they were in 1945? Absolutely not. Because jets replaced them (the rules changed). A spitfire mk4 would run circles around any monoplane today. What monoplane can reach speeds of 500 mph?

If you gave a bunch of marines Bayonets, do you think they could deal with some legionaires trained to fight in formation? No it would be a massacre (the rules changed).

The average pro today has 100�s of Amy fights - fighting in a style based on points, foam gloves, short rounds, head gear and less rounds. The style required to succeed in this is not a style suited for 15 round professional bouts with 8 oz Cleto reyes. No, a single punch can take you out under these conditions. When a fighter goes pro, he can�t change his style after fighting one way for so long.

Boxrec can�t give you accurate figures on active fighters of the past because smaller venues weren�t even documented. People fought all the time. Club fights were a side hustle. Even in the 70�s it was common for professional fighters in Mexico to fight pro, then rack up a few more dollars fighting at pubs (sometimes bare knuckle) in unsanctioned bouts, often a few a night even. I can confirm Carlos zarate did this.

The game has changed completely. In so many ways.

So has boxing evolved? If we are talking who beats who then the answer is NO. A hard NO. So much has been lost because the style is completely different. They fight like amateurs now, with a few standouts obviously. If the evolution is talking about changes then yes it has evolved. Fighters get paid more, take less damage, fight less and get title shots sooner and easier. Rehydration clauses allows fighters to come in heavier - which may or may not be beneficial. In the event where the extra weight gives them an advantage though (Which I suspect it really doesn�t) then simply match them with a lower weight class to be fair. If you think Marciano is too small (It wouldn�t matter, but some people refute this) then match Marciano against cruiserweights.

Lastly, there are 4 titles per weight class and twice as many weight classes as before. That�s 5x (even more) the amount of world titles floating around. This makes Floyds claim that he beat the most world champions completely void. That�s just one example of many.

Lol, same old story: So much knowledge has been lost over the years, because trainers today are lazy and uneducated - resulting in boxers who fight like amateurs. However, most fans aren't really aware of this, because they are too ignorant, and need someone with superior knowledge (you!), to explain it to them. Jesus...

But then again, you're the guy who make ridiculous claims about today's fighters having glass jaws and thinner sculls (LOL!) than the oldtimers - so it's very difficult to take your never-ending attempt to belittle modern boxing/boxers seriously!

[kara]

- - Thanks to DKings blatant fixed farces.

Usual idjits moan about how good his cards were when KING coopting most of the purses for he and KingJr.

Speakinf of, he who dropped off the boxing charts to live a life of wh0ring dissolution.

King Jr. vanished like a fart in the wind.

[Willow The Wisp]

King Jr. vanished like a fart in the wind.

I wonder if he'll inherit?

[Willie Pep 229]

I wonder if he'll inherit?

Do you think there is much left?

[them_apples]

Both the ipad and iphone produce those weird symbols. Its so annoying

[them_apples]

Lol, same old story: So much knowledge has been lost over the years, because trainers today are lazy and uneducated - resulting in boxers who fight like amateurs. However, most fans aren't really aware of this, because they are too ignorant, and need someone with superior knowledge (you!), to explain it to them. Jesus...

But then again, you're the guy who make ridiculous claims about today's fighters having glass jaws and thinner sculls (LOL!) than the oldtimers - so it's very difficult to take your never-ending attempt to belittle modern boxing/boxers seriously!

Same old response, you never got the point of that post.

THE CONCEPT OF OLD TIMERS HAVING BETTER CHINS WAS BY VIRTUE OF NATURAL SELECTION NOT A MUTATION. ITS THE SAME CONCEPT OF BASKETBALL PLAYERS GETTING TALLER BECAUSE THE SPORT ATTRACTS TALLER PLAYERS, NOT THAT PLAYERS HAVE ACTUALLY GROWN (7fters have always exsisted but never found a sport that benefitted them).

WHY FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO YOU KEEP REPEATING THE SAME STATEMENT WHICH WAS NEVER CLAIMED, NEVER SAID AND IS SOMETHING YOU MADE UP IN YOUR OWN MIND. GO REREAD THE THREAD GODAMNIT.

I know what my original point was. The sport didnâà‚€Â ™t allow to anyone to have a glass jaw, they never got past journeyman status. The Petronelli brothers said if a fighter was found to have a glass jaw, he was told to quit regardless of his talent.

not trying to be overly rude here but can you confirm to me the point I was making? Please repeat it back to me. You keep wording it like I was claiming people as a whole had tougher chins and evolved to have glass jaws through softer living. NO just like a swimmers body is something you are born with, so is a chin. YOU NEEDED a strong jaw to make it in boxing so therefore all the top fighters back in the day HAD GOOD CHINS. Any of the glass jawed fighters remained club fighters and were likely rarely or never recorded. In a sport with 8oz horse hair gloves and almost a requirement to “fightâ€Â� � in order to sell tickets, coupled with the general temperament of the time (we had wars every 20 years up until then) means a glass jaw is not gonna be something a world champion or a number 1 ranked contender would somehow have.

YOU DONâÃÂÂ� �€Â ™T NEED A GOOD CHIN ANYMORE TO MAKE IT TO TOP AS LONG AS YOU HAVE GOOD MANAGERS. There are 5x times as many belts ffs, and a fighters worth is purely valued by his draw numbers. There are fighters today that are 30-0 and still haven’t even passed a chin test thanks to managers and weak competition / amateur styles.