Why todays era is better than past eras. Discussion.

[BattlingNelson]

A graph showing the number of active fighters through the years:



It's taken from another forum.

The talentpool is way bigger today which would potentially give better fighters. Of course we also have 9 more weightdivisions compared to the 20's which (Again potentially) offsets this.

[Bundana]

Thanks, Bat.

[Tom Cruise]

Ignoring the obvious difficulties in record keeping the further into the past you go, Im not sure this works looking at it from a purely statistical 'more equals better' perspective. A few arguments against:

1. If we looked at the stats for Cuban pro boxing their 'world champs -> amount of active pro boxers' ratio in isolation it would be insane. But this ignores the fact that often only the very best Amateurs are able to get the backing to leave Cuba and compete in the pros which completely skews the stats.

In relation to this thread, I could point to the fact that the youth development systems for all the other big sports (in america and globally) are much more efficient than they were in the past. Most kids with the best potential are scouted and picked up before or during their teenage years by sports such as Football, Am Football, Rugby, Tennis, Basketball, Baseball, etc etc. Thats a huge chunk creamed directly off the top of the pool of athletic talent which wasnt happening to the same degree in the past. In America this has had the most drastic affect in the divisions 175lbs and above due to the nature of their most popular sports.

2. Another argument I would have is based something I was told about competitive cycling in Britain. So according to my old A-Level PE teacher one of the reasons that we became a dominant force in Cycling was that we built a Velodrome in Manchester for the Commonwealth games. it was the only one in the country at the time and all of the top level cyclists and coaches gravitated towards the area to take advantage of the arena. From their you get exchanging of ideas and fierce competition and top level improved drastically because of this.

In the past you could draw comparisons with this to how boxing was centered in America. The vast majority of the best trainers, and the best fighters, were all in the same country, often in the same areas, and out of this, for the same reasons as cycling in britain, the overall quality of fighter increased

3. Finally. Amateur boxing. As time has gone on (up until very recently) Amateur boxing has drifted further and further away from Pro boxing in terms of scoring and rules. This IMO has had an extremely negative effect on the quality of fighters that come through the traditional route to top level boxing. LAck of inside fighting, effective power punching and ring generalmanship are some of the obvious areas where Am boxing has had a negative effect. On top of that a lot of the 'new' countries to pro boxing are former soviet states, and their fighters are heavily geared towards Am boxing, often staying Amateur until they are 30+.

Thats not to say that Am boxing isnt still the main route for top level boxers to enter the sport, just that the skills they are learning in the ams now are not as suited to Pro boxing as they were in the past.

I will admit the stats were a surprise to me, but they werent produced in a vacuum. Lots of other factors go into producing top level talent.

Im sure there are counter arguments to what I;ve said, and probably loads of arguments that I;ve missed.

[juggernaut666]

A graph showing the number of active fighters through the years:



It's taken from another forum.

The talentpool is way bigger today which would potentially give better fighters. Of course we also have 9 more weightdivisions compared to the 20's which (Again potentially) offsets this.

All sports grow and advance in any category through population,MOST sports also advance thru combination of things ,history/Video/resources etc.. availabilty of ones opponent/better access to modern diet/more focus on the specific sport/better fundamentals of sports science/ In almost any Olympic even tas well records are being broken almost always.


The HW divison? Well put Carnera or Baer against almost almost any shw today and they lose easily.


Put SRR against RJJ and I don't think its a question RJJ would win that one.



Put Lewis/Klitcko against ali and theres no way I favor Ali.



Cruiser Holyfield > Joe Louis

Of course these are my examples and opinions but the reference can almost always be used when lining up similar fighters of different eras.



on the current era I would say the majority HW may not be as slick but they are no longer the same weights hence its a different weight class any which way you look at it when 19 of 20 top 20 boxers are over 220. And reality many 230 plus fighters move pretty good,fury is proof of that heres a 6'9 260 plus guy dancing around the ring with really good footwork. That would be unheard of in any other era.


One can argue the size vs skill but that doesn't take away the competitive modern SHW era now.


Overall the more fighters the more competition,personally I see just as good if not better more refined fighters in all categories today. Are they better? That's an opinion,i would say overall yes.

[Weltschmerz]

The former Soviet states competing professionally on an international level has been a major factor in the increase of competition during the last 25 years.

[Elroy1]

A graph showing the number of active fighters through the years:



It's taken from another forum.

The talentpool is way bigger today which would potentially give better fighters. Of course we also have 9 more weightdivisions compared to the 20's which (Again potentially) offsets this.

OR strengthens it!

If you imposed only half the divisions on the current era as then, then now already much larger talent pool would e roughly doubled again!

And when comparing HW partiipation to yesteryears, obviously we should take heavy and cruiser combined as the full figures.

[Elroy1]

The former Soviet states competing professionally on an international level has been a major factor in the increase of competition during the last 25 years.

Yes it certainly represented a dramatic and irreversible sudden increase, the opening up of the East and raised competition to a previously unheralded level.

[Elroy1]

All sports grow and advance in any category through population,MOST sports also advance thru combination of things ,history/Video/resources etc.. availabilty of ones opponent/better access to modern diet/more focus on the specific sport/better fundamentals of sports science/ In almost any Olympic even tas well records are being broken almost always.


The HW divison? Well put Carnera or Baer against almost almost any shw today and they lose easily.


Put SRR against RJJ and I don't think its a question RJJ would win that one.



Put Lewis/Klitcko against ali and theres no way I favor Ali.



Cruiser Holyfield > Joe Louis

Of course these are my examples and opinions but the reference can almost always be used when lining up similar fighters of different eras.



on the current era I would say the majority HW may not be as slick but they are no longer the same weights hence its a different weight class any which way you look at it when 19 of 20 top 20 boxers are over 220. And reality many 230 plus fighters move pretty good,fury is proof of that heres a 6'9 260 plus guy dancing around the ring with really good footwork. That would be unheard of in any other era.


One can argue the size vs skill but that doesn't take away the competitive modern SHW era now.


Overall the more fighters the more competition,personally I see just as good if not better more refined fighters in all categories today. Are they better? That's an opinion,i would say overall yes.

An excellent summary.

[Pugilist_Spec]

All sports grow and advance in any category through population,MOST sports also advance thru combination of things ,history/Video/resources etc.. availabilty of ones opponent/better access to modern diet/more focus on the specific sport/better fundamentals of sports science/ In almost any Olympic even tas well records are being broken almost always.


The HW divison? Well put Carnera or Baer against almost almost any shw today and they lose easily.


Put SRR against RJJ and I don't think its a question RJJ would win that one.



Put Lewis/Klitcko against ali and theres no way I favor Ali.



Cruiser Holyfield > Joe Louis

Of course these are my examples and opinions but the reference can almost always be used when lining up similar fighters of different eras.



on the current era I would say the majority HW may not be as slick but they are no longer the same weights hence its a different weight class any which way you look at it when 19 of 20 top 20 boxers are over 220. And reality many 230 plus fighters move pretty good,fury is proof of that heres a 6'9 260 plus guy dancing around the ring with really good footwork. That would be unheard of in any other era.


One can argue the size vs skill but that doesn't take away the competitive modern SHW era now.


Overall the more fighters the more competition,personally I see just as good if not better more refined fighters in all categories today. Are they better? That's an opinion,i would say overall yes.

Why SRR? He was a welterweight. Put Michael Spinks and I think he KOs Roy.

Cruiserweight Holyfield gets KOd by Louis. You think he can handle Louis power at 190 lb?

Ditto on Ali against Lewis and the Klitschkos, but I think Holmes and Foreman could very well beat them.

[juggernaut666]

Why SRR? He was a welterweight. Put Michael Spinks and I think he KOs Roy.

Cruiserweight Holyfield gets KOd by Louis. You think he can handle Louis power at 190 lb?

Ditto on Ali against Lewis and the Klitschkos, but I think Holmes and Foreman could very well beat them.

Spinks may beat Jones ,he may not......SRR fought at 150/160 and similar weight to Jones ,he would be far to susceptible in defense and foot work.



Holyfield had a chin of granite and by FAR would be more skilled then anyone Louis ever fought,and so fast that Louis who was fast himself and often needed his opposition to stop moving to plant those quick combos would easily get flustered and k.od by round 5/6.People forget Holyfield was 6'2 himself , and one of the most complete fighters of all time.Louis would have holes in defense stradegy and foot work style .Basically Louis the slower paced counter puncher who relied on bating his opposition at certain distances is now up against a fast paced one who never stops using head movement /footwork/combinations and can also brawl.Louis would need a k.o ,taking punches from the likes of Foreman at a slighter heavier weight of about 205 ,i dont think his chin is in question,however would Louis who hit the deck numerous times do the same?



Again these are just examples on a whole since the 90's boxing has drastically changed.Weather someone can beat either Klitchko or not isnt really the point ,the further you go to past era the less chance you find anyone winning .Personally i would only put Lewis and Tyson as my top 2 guys who can potentially defeat them at their best if i had to pick..... .maybe Holmes if i included a third? I wouldn't favor any against them ,anyone can win these fights .