Tweet
An 0-0 record on boxrec doesn't necessarily mean that the boxer has never fought before (although it might). It just means that research has been unable to validate any prior fights that particular boxer had. They may have had fights they're just not on record. These records are constantly being updated.
There are a number of reasons why I hesitate to compare not just fighters, but the records of fighters from different eras.
Firstly the amateur issue which BP brought up is certainly valid. Because of the economic climate that old time fighters lived in, they often turned pro at 16 (sometimes less) while today's often don't turn pro until they're 20 or more. Lennox Lewis didn't turn pro until he was almost 24 years old.
If an amateur has in the neighbourhood of 100-200 amateur fights, that certainly qualifies as legitimate fighting/training/coaching experience as opposed to an old time fighter who turns pro under poor conditions with no amateur background and gets his experience fighting in one horse towns against the local tough guy, often training themselves with no formal instruction or coaching.
In terms of ability, a world class amateur (gold medal winner) after turning pro and if managed correctly and developed incrementally is often legitimately at the doorstep of the top 10 or even a title fight within 2-3 years and 20 fights.
Incrementally matchmaking a fighter against better and more difficult opponents allows a fighter to improve and progress more rapidly than fighting 70-80 fights against C and D level fighters. Evander Holyfield, Sugar Ray Leonard, Muhammad Ali....there are many examples.
In addition a world class fighter today would find it difficult to get a Boxing Commission to approve a fight against a D level opponent. Many old time fighters could pad their records, keep active and make money fighting opposition that was far inferior to them even if they were world class.
Nowadays a world class fighter ie: Delahoya, Mayweather, Mosley, Taylor, Hopkins etc...will continue to fight only world class opponents and in the case of B-Hop has done so for several years.
There are a number of reasons why I hesitate to compare not just fighters, but the records of fighters from different eras.
Firstly the amateur issue which BP brought up is certainly valid. Because of the economic climate that old time fighters lived in, they often turned pro at 16 (sometimes less) while today's often don't turn pro until they're 20 or more. Lennox Lewis didn't turn pro until he was almost 24 years old.
If an amateur has in the neighbourhood of 100-200 amateur fights, that certainly qualifies as legitimate fighting/training/coaching experience as opposed to an old time fighter who turns pro under poor conditions with no amateur background and gets his experience fighting in one horse towns against the local tough guy, often training themselves with no formal instruction or coaching.
In terms of ability, a world class amateur (gold medal winner) after turning pro and if managed correctly and developed incrementally is often legitimately at the doorstep of the top 10 or even a title fight within 2-3 years and 20 fights.
Incrementally matchmaking a fighter against better and more difficult opponents allows a fighter to improve and progress more rapidly than fighting 70-80 fights against C and D level fighters. Evander Holyfield, Sugar Ray Leonard, Muhammad Ali....there are many examples.
In addition a world class fighter today would find it difficult to get a Boxing Commission to approve a fight against a D level opponent. Many old time fighters could pad their records, keep active and make money fighting opposition that was far inferior to them even if they were world class.
Nowadays a world class fighter ie: Delahoya, Mayweather, Mosley, Taylor, Hopkins etc...will continue to fight only world class opponents and in the case of B-Hop has done so for several years.
Comment