-
-
You ever watch the show Ghosts? The viking character seems to have something against Danes from the time he died. Hope that's not still a thing between you guys and I guess Norwegians. Even funnier on the show is when that character Thor meets his ghost son Bjorn, he finds out his son married a Danish woman and had 3 children with her lol. But now he's bound to this house he died in with some 50s style housewife.
Comment
-
Stephen "Breadman" Edwards on why he thinks the 1940's were the best:
"Overall the 1940s is the best decade in the history of boxing in my opinion. Henry Amrstrong ended his reign in the 1940s and Armstrong was considered the best fighter of the 1930s. Joe Louis was the heavyweight champion. Billy Conn the light heavyweight stand out with Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles emerging as even better light heavyweights. Black Murderers Row had about 7 or 8 great contenders with Charley Burley leading the way. Marcel Cerdan, Jake Lamotta, Tony Zale and Rocky Graziano were all top middleweights. Sugar Ray Robinson was the best welterweight and fighter of the decade. Kid Gavilan was a top contender. Ike Williams was the best lightweight of the decade with Beau Jack , Sammy Angott and Bob Montgomery being almost as great. Willie Pep had a great decade, as did emerging Sandy Saddler at featherweight. Manuel Ortiz was a HOF bantamweight. There is NO decade greater or better than the 1940s."Comment
-
[QUOTE=Bundana;n31702582]
Even without the participation of eastern block countries, there were more active pro boxers in the late 20s/early 30s, than at any other time during the gloved history of boxing.
The annual "body count" culminated from '28 to '33. These 6 years are the only ones, where BoxRec's database shows more active pros than today!
From the late 30's a drastic decline started, which lasted for more than 50 years - until the numbers started to gradually pick up in the '90s. Slowly at first, but then faster and faster - until we are now not much behind the '28 to '33 numbers.
Total Bouts in the BoxRec Database: By Decade - Page 4 - BoxRec (see 19 May 2019 post)
For annual number of fights, see 15 May 2020 post.
Numbers are strongly determinate. We agree.
For anyone not following your assertion, look at two scools. School 1 boasts 10,000 in the student body. School 2 only 500. In building a roster of, say, a basketball team, which school has the advantage?
Next, the other factors are weighed. The deviation you refer to. If Era 1 holds a 5% active fighter advantage over Era 2, but quality trainers are available more plentifully to lower roster era 2 by a factor of x2, how is is this impact calculated? Likely, by the net higher training quality of the smaller sample group. And so it goes. Tip of the iceberg.
Your suggestion is a way to ****genize the playing field in order to compare eras. But it is a more complex errand of data collection and analysis than when you began the concept; a bright, well liked poster like you will agree. But the concept is well begun, though the parsing of the impact of such data will invariably segue into tangentially related concepts, such as international spread, cultural models, nutrition, style evolution, financial incentification, etc. All part of the analytics piece.
You have posted that "Since The Wall came down, the annual count of active pro boxers has gone up dramatically", which we see at Boxrec. Instructive to note that in the same timeframe the international amateur program has undergone a converse trajectory as state sponsorship has fallen, yielding not more coached fighters active 1940-1976 forward, but a higher percent getting paid to do it after the age of consent.
Just letting know know I read your posts.
One of my favorite posters.
I hope a can provide boxing sense on occasion for you as well here.Comment
Tweet
Comment