Why have modern fighters not evolved to be better than SRR

[them_apples]

Your post looks very strange (is it only me?)... but I think, I'm able to make out, that you believe the many fighters who were thrown out for not making an effort in the old days, actually backs up your contention, that the game back then bred gladitators. Sure, why not!

How about the oldtimers meeting the same opponents over and over again... was that also instrumental in generating gladiators? Or could it be seen as an indication, that not all fights back in the day were super-serious... and that some may have been friendly matches between boxers, who were simply helping each other to make some money? What do you think?

Not sure about the post, I type on my phone and it posts with all these weird additions. in general most of my errors are from phone typing.

I have never heard of deliberately friendly bouts taking place, but being friends with another fighter and fighting them for money is very common and always was. fighting a good fighter multiple times is very very risky if you care about your record, giving an evenly matched fighter another chance to adjust just increases the odds of you eventually losing.

If Pacquiao never fought Marquez a 4th time = never would have been koed by him. and if Lamotta never got rematch with robinson, he never would have got that victory, and likely wouldn't be remembered very well in boxing.

[Bundana]

Not sure about the post, I type on my phone and it posts with all these weird additions. in general most of my errors are from phone typing.

I have never heard of deliberately friendly bouts taking place, but being friends with another fighter and fighting them for money is very common and always was. fighting a good fighter multiple times is very very risky if you care about your record, giving an evenly matched fighter another chance to adjust just increases the odds of you eventually losing.

If Pacquiao never fought Marquez a 4th time = never would have been koed by him. and if Lamotta never got rematch with robinson, he never would have got that victory, and likely wouldn't be remembered very well in boxing.

Back in the ND era, there were loads of fights between boxers who met 6, 7, 8 or even more times. Looking at their records, it sure seems to me, like these boxers had a good thing going - trying to make a little money, and than attempting to flatten each other! Doesn't it make sense, that during those hard times boxers were trying to help each other, rather than hurting each other?

[them_apples]

Back in the ND era, there were loads of fights between boxers who met 6, 7, 8 or even more times. Looking at their records, it sure seems to me, like these boxers had a good thing going - trying to make a little money, and than attempting to flatten each other! Doesn't it make sense, that during those hard times boxers were trying to help each other, rather than hurting each other?

Not really because people got mad if they didnt fight, last thing you wanted was a rep for stinking the place out. Its not like today where ppv sales make money as long as the buildup is good. Before this, people actually wanted to see a good fight. Or a knockout at least

[Bundana]

Not really because people got mad if they didnt fight, last thing you wanted was a rep for stinking the place out. Its not like today where ppv sales make money as long as the buildup is good. Before this, people actually wanted to see a good fight. Or a knockout at least

Well, I guess you have to actually dive into the old records, to understand what was really going on.

Take a look at part of Battling Levinsky's record:
1912-05-24 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-07 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-14 outpointed **** Gilbert over 20 rounds at Jacksonville

Gilbert was a low-level journeyman with a losing record, so why was he matched 3 times, over 3 weeks, with a much more experienced future HOFer? I doubt the two had been booked for those 3 dates in advance, so here's what I think went on: the fans apparently enjoyed their first fight so much, that they were asked back for a second appearance two weeks later. When that was also a success, they were asked back for a 3rd fight already the following week. The two obviously had a good thing going, and I sincerely doubt Levinsky tried very hard to go for a knockout.

Incidentally, the two were back in Jacksonville 6 months later for a 4th meeting, where Levinsky won on points after 25 rounds!

Of course there were many much longer series from the ND era than Levinsky-Gilbet. For example:

Pancho Villa fought Mike Ballerino 10 times.
Jack Britton fought Johnny Griffith 9 times, and Soldier Bartfield 8 times.
Jack Dillon fought Battling Levinsky 10 times and George Chip 12 times.
Battling Levinsky fought Porky Dan Flynn 9 times.
Johnny Dundee fought Joe Welling and Benny Leonard 8 times each.
Harry Greb fought Al Delmont 8 times and Chuck Wigging 9 times.

I might add, that all of these fights lasted the full distance! Not a single one ended inside schedule... so no, the fans weren't always screaming for a knockout, but could obviously also enjoy a fine boxing exhibition. Don't you think this indicates (doesn't prove, but indicates!), that in at least some fights the two combatants may have carried each other - so they could both live to fight another day? Or is that thought too weird for you?

[QueensburyRules]

Well, I guess you have to actually dive into the old records, to understand what was really going on.

Take a look at part of Battling Levinsky's record:
1912-05-24 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-07 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-14 outpointed **** Gilbert over 20 rounds at Jacksonville

Gilbert was a low-level journeyman with a losing record, so why was he matched 3 times, over 3 weeks, with a much more experienced future HOFer? I doubt the two had been booked for those 3 dates in advance, so here's what I think went on: the fans apparently enjoyed their first fight so much, that they were asked back for a second appearance two weeks later. When that was also a success, they were asked back for a 3rd fight already the following week. The two obviously had a good thing going, and I sincerely doubt Levinsky tried very hard to go for a knockout.

Incidentally, the two were back in Jacksonville 6 months later for a 4th meeting, where Levinsky won on points after 25 rounds!

Of course there were many much longer series from the ND era than Levinsky-Gilbet. For example:

Pancho Villa fought Mike Ballerino 10 times.
Jack Britton fought Johnny Griffith 9 times, and Soldier Bartfield 8 times.
Jack Dillon fought Battling Levinsky 10 times and George Chip 12 times.
Battling Levinsky fought Porky Dan Flynn 9 times.
Johnny Dundee fought Joe Welling and Benny Leonard 8 times each.
Harry Greb fought Al Delmont 8 times and Chuck Wigging 9 times.

I might add, that all of these fights lasted the full distance! Not a single one ended inside schedule... so no, the fans weren't always screaming for a knockout, but could obviously also enjoy a fine boxing exhibition. Don't you think this indicates (doesn't prove, but indicates!), that in at least some fights the two combatants may have carried each other - so they could both live to fight another day? Or is that thought too weird for you?

- - Quite probable, but they still had to fight and take punches, thus the credit that they do receive.

[Bundana]

- - Quite probable, but they still had to fight and take punches, thus the credit that they do receive.

Yes, they still had to fight... but maybe not always as hard, as some people like to think!

[billeau2]

Well, I guess you have to actually dive into the old records, to understand what was really going on.

Take a look at part of Battling Levinsky's record:
1912-05-24 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-07 outpointed **** Gilbert over 15 rounds at Jacksonville
1912-06-14 outpointed **** Gilbert over 20 rounds at Jacksonville

Gilbert was a low-level journeyman with a losing record, so why was he matched 3 times, over 3 weeks, with a much more experienced future HOFer? I doubt the two had been booked for those 3 dates in advance, so here's what I think went on: the fans apparently enjoyed their first fight so much, that they were asked back for a second appearance two weeks later. When that was also a success, they were asked back for a 3rd fight already the following week. The two obviously had a good thing going, and I sincerely doubt Levinsky tried very hard to go for a knockout.

Incidentally, the two were back in Jacksonville 6 months later for a 4th meeting, where Levinsky won on points after 25 rounds!

Of course there were many much longer series from the ND era than Levinsky-Gilbet. For example:

Pancho Villa fought Mike Ballerino 10 times.
Jack Britton fought Johnny Griffith 9 times, and Soldier Bartfield 8 times.
Jack Dillon fought Battling Levinsky 10 times and George Chip 12 times.
Battling Levinsky fought Porky Dan Flynn 9 times.
Johnny Dundee fought Joe Welling and Benny Leonard 8 times each.
Harry Greb fought Al Delmont 8 times and Chuck Wigging 9 times.

I might add, that all of these fights lasted the full distance! Not a single one ended inside schedule... so no, the fans weren't always screaming for a knockout, but could obviously also enjoy a fine boxing exhibition. Don't you think this indicates (doesn't prove, but indicates!), that in at least some fights the two combatants may have carried each other - so they could both live to fight another day? Or is that thought too weird for you?

A couple of considerations: I do think your point has merit and that there were... trying to put this in a historical context here... They were sometimes called "works." You saw a lot of them in grappling circles. For example, in Brazil, where fighters often wrestled as part of shows, some guys would agree to a friendly match to be able to entertain. Keep in mind that eventually these guys would still fight, but there were stipulations for matches that were "friendly" so to speak.

Works in boxing no doubt existed... But not just because a man fought a guy multiple times. You did a good thing in mentioning the relative skill level of opposition when using "Levinsky" which does buttress your point. But, most of the great Black Fighters had to fight each other in perpetuatity! And given the immense talent of these guys this multiple fighting did not make for an easier match with each other... quite the opposite.

So, there are a couple of scenarios with regard to this practice. In the history of combatives, including in countries with a much richer, varied tradition of competition like Brazil, Indian Wrestling, etc... doing the "Works" for a bought was not illegitimate, simply a way to introduce fans to the skills and to socialize them to look forward to real competitions.

I should also point out the opposite: We have documentation of MMA type affairs off the hawain islands. These were bouts that guys went into with virtually no preset understanding... or very little.

[Willie Pep 229]

What if we put aside this argument and only evaluate/compare the old timers in their serious fights (say their most important 40 fights) to the fighter's today (whose total bouts usualy comes close to 40). Were these fights contested at a different level of voilence/determination/toughness ?

[QueensburyRules]

- - Bringing back to Sam vs Harry, what, 22-24x?

Early doors Sam KOs Harry, but eventually unable to fight without looking down following feet movement because of growing blindness. Harry wins the rest, but both were such legends by then Harry could start to carry a grateful Sam because they were good friends, a good $$$ deal for them and the fans who only wanted to see them in action.

[Bundana]

What if we put aside this argument and only evaluate/compare the old timers in their serious fights (say their most important 40 fights) to the fighter's today (whose total bouts usualy comes close to 40). Where these fights contested at a different level of voilence/determination/toughness ?

So if we take the absolute top fights from back in the day, and compare them to the top fights of recent years... can we detect a change over time, when it comes to those parameters you mention?

That's a very good question... but we have so little footage of the old timers, that I'm not sure we can answer this in a meaningful way. There were some cracking fights in the past, but also some complete duds... just like today! I don't see how we can determine, with reasonable certainty, which era comes out "on top", so to speak.