Why is it that the past > present?

[Banderivets]

All things being equal, past fighters are better. That is fact. These guys studied there craft. Alot of these no hopers today dont do that. They are just in for the quick buck.

Yes, but those that do study their craft today, have the ability to study off of Ali and Duran, and have hte ability to take it to the next level.

Marciano wasnt much use to Ali was he? Skill role model wise

[aljon]

There are fighters that can compete in ANY era. Guys like Basilio, Robinson, Duran, Chavez, Arguello, etc. These guys would be world class in ANY era. It doesn't matter. And to think that Robinson was weighing in at 158 for alot of his fights. Imagine if he had the training techniques that today's fighters used.

All things being equal, past fighters are better. That is fact. These guys studied there craft. Alot of these no hopers today dont do that. They are just in for the quick buck.

How is that a fact? I don't even know why I'm bothering with you ignorants..
You should know what the word fact means before you use it.. www.encarta.com

[FightNight32]

Everybody makes it seem everything was better back then in every sport. Baseball by far.

[Feint]

Everybody makes it seem everything was better back then in every sport. Baseball by far.

Great point.

Take baseball, historians estimate that Babe Ruth never faced a pitch that was above 90 mph. Most pitchers in MLB can throw at least that. Football too. Look at the '85 Bears with William Perry, he was seen as an anomaly because he was over 300 pounds. Football rosters now have many 300+ pound players.

I believe boxing is the same. Yes, there are weight limits except for Heavyweights but training methods have gotten better, nutrition is better, and for the Heavyweights, they have gotten bigger.

The question is, are boxers faster today than they were 20, 30, or 40 years ago? I am not 100% sure as it would be based on estimates rather than hard data but I would suggest they are to some extent. (Although I would also say speed probably has not increased as much as size has.)

This certainly does not take away from what any past athlete has accomplished, but you simply have to measure them in the era in which they performed.

[Run]

All I know is prime Roy would toy with everyone in history.

SRR, Hagler, SRL, Hearns, Monzon, Spinks whoever. He would have made them look like they were inferior because that's what they were.

He's the G.O.A.T.

And tomorrow night if he stops Hanshaw that just reinforces that. Because he shouldn't even still be fighting at his status.



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[gigogreco]

i think it should be rather divided.. post and pre 70s

if we take the golden days of hw boxing, the ali, foreman, frazier liston era.. from the 70s and on

i really dont think the sport has evolved that much, not since then.. ffs didnt an old george foreman make a comeback and beating the lineal champ moorer at an age close to 50..

take a look at the physique, the way their body was build, they were looked like athletes, the top of the hw division had tremendous physique back then, now take a look at top ten.. they look rather fat and bulked up, peter doesnt look trimmed, chagaev, toney and the list goes on .

**** it, the hw div more often then not, they look sloppy.. so i find it ****** to claim, that its has evolved that much.. in that era it was 15 rounds of boxing, whilr today its 10 or 12.. how does that mean evolvment..

some mentioned hearns, leonard amd duran.. ill include whitaker in that bunch, just to make a point...

that must have been the most ****** and ignorant boxing fan ever..

hearns out of his prime, and out if ideal weight still fought for championship belts around the late 80s and early 90´s..

i guy like leonard, just look at the guy fighting, do you see such talent in todays boxing..

a guy like whitaker, what a talent, people today claim pbf is p4p, rewind the tape and time, here is a pbf-version just this is a punching versiion of a defensive wizard... with a punch put put of around 800-1000 punches a fight..

and whitaker, out of prime and out of his ideal weight class, fought tha golden boy and lost a very very controversial decision.. the golden boy, who would be the product of the evolved era.. i might add, that whitaker even landed more punches..

and whitaker isnt even the brightest stars of those in the 80s..

leonard is considered greater, as is duran, who fought for titles in aprox 20 years.. that should put things into a little perspective

thsoe claiming the sport has evovled that much, are ****ing ******s..

as said earlier, we have a foreman at age close to 50, competing for the lineal title and won it..

hearns way out of prime and his original weight, started at 147 i believe and finishe at lhw, and stil copmpeting for titles..

we have a whitaker loosing a fight he should have won, to the product of the "evolved" generation..

the most evolved physical specimen in hw boxing history is tyson, far from today, his peak was also in the 80s..

someone mentioned rjj, well how oftern have we seen such talent..?? not that many times, but guess what, in the 80s there is a couple.. watch hearns and his technique, watch leonard.. watch whitaker, and youll se, that the 80s generation was filled with fighters, better then the ones today..

[monkeyboy]

I give credit for an open questioning thread.
Some of the answers given are simplistic to the point of idiocy.
Not even the most vitriolic historians will claim that all fighters are better than modern day fighters. Good childhood nutrition and better scientific sports study go a long way to giving the contemporary fighter a health and fitness edge. However, consider the fact that nearly all boxing training is virtually unchanged from generation to generation. Weights are still relatively unused because they generally detract more from a fighters abilities than add.
Also please try to understand that only certain fighters stand out as exceptional and they do so with the weight of hindsight.
I don't need to repeat the names of the greats from down the ages but remember that they are a tiny tiny percentage of the boxers fighting at the time. Most modern enthusiasts are comparing our tiny slice of time with 120 years of boxing (and most of it with boxing far more popular than it currently is). For 10 to 20 boxers to stand out in a century's time seems very understandable. For fans who have not considered the larger picture to claim that there are boxers from just one decade or so who should be considered just as good is exceptionally naive.
If your favorite is that great, then he (or eventually she) will be recognised as such.

I don't really care how 'great' your recent favorite is. There are too many ways for a current fighter to fabricate greatness. Only a retrospective look at their whole career and consideration of their achievements will give an honest picture.

There may be one or two current or recent fighters to go into the pantheon of true greats but to start throwing all the names around that people do is hopeful in the extreme.

Additionally remember, those of us who look at past boxers do so because we LOVE boxing and don't just love the current celebrity fighters. We ALL want to be watching when the next ALL TIME GREAT finds his place. But believe me when he turns up we'll all know it.

[eazy_mas]

well they are wuit frew assuption

1. Old timers where multi-fighters. They could box-swarm and even brawl. so they could change abit of there style if needed

2. Steriod regulation you dont know how many of these athelt are taking it. Just remeber that Arron Pryor made history with the white magic drink.

3. Money issue and People interst. long time ago there where more people interst in boxing as well as many boxers are well paid. Sugar Ray Lenarod earn 10mil and that was in the 80s or something like that. compared to DHL the only person who get 50mil and Mayweather got 10mil it not that much of money if you put the inflation and other stuff. as for the people boxing was have gotten more attention from the media back then, Tyson, Duran, Ali, Surgar Ray. It was not only athletical attention but also celebirty like status. A Hero to many eye e****alyl when there where many countries competiting against each others

[Brockton Lip]

All I know is prime Roy would toy with everyone in history.

SRR, Hagler, SRL, Hearns, Monzon, Spinks whoever. He would have made them look like they were inferior because that's what they were.

He's the G.O.A.T.

And tomorrow night if he stops Hanshaw that just reinforces that. Because he shouldn't even still be fighting at his status.

Are you being sarcastic?