Do we overate fighters from the past?

[RayLeonard82]

It seems like elite fighters from the past automatically get the edge if they were matched up in today's era. There's a assumption that the fighter today would have no chance. Why is that? It's the same with basketball. If you get into a discussion about the 1980's Lakers vs the Shaq and Kobe Lakers ppl get upset when you say 2001 Lakers would win. I simply bring up facts that when Kareem when up against a power/versatile center they lost 3 times. 1981 and 1983 to Moses Malone and in 1986 when Akeem torched them they lost so why not prime Shaq along with Kobe. Shaq and Kobe is much more dangerous than Moses and 33 year old Dr J and they swept LA 4-0. Robert Parish ain't on the level of those two and LA beat Boston. The 1988 Pistons had Bill Laimbeer who was very good but not Moses or Akeem level.

There have been discussions about SRL vs past fighters or Muhammad Ali vs fighters of today and the assumption is ooooooh are you kidding me they win with ease.

[baracuda]

yes especially the ones in the 1920's or something.....and some of them got youtube videos where you could judge for yourself.....and...colored tv would've been the **** back then...lol

[aristotlemoses]

No, not really. I mean who really knows theres no way to tell either way.
But cmon it just seemed like they were hungrier back than fought more and had tougher comp.

[RayLeonard82]

lol...Man if colored tv was around then ppl wouldn't leave there house

[-EX-]

Some overrate the fighters of today...

[Syf]

No, not really. I mean who really knows theres no way to tell either way.
But cmon it just seemed like they were hungrier back than fought more and had tougher comp.

Basically..,

Boxing was more important to more people back then... Ali was not only a sports figure, he was a political figure as well. He captured American newspaper headlines like modern boxers can only dream of.

My point there is seeing all the shine he was getting, a lot of HW top competition rose up to try and steal that shine, hence it made the HW division more stacked than it is now.

And thats just one example.

[mrpain81]

That's why I like Merchant, he's been around and he isn't one of those guys who ****s on the new fighters and makes it seem like the old fighters were unbeatable. Most the old school fight fans give no credit to the new fighters and make them out to be inferior to the older counter parts, just go to Cyberboxingzone .com and take a look..

3:05

[apokalips]

Merchant is a Floyd hater though haha. Anyway I do believe that past fighters tend to be overrated...its the same in all sports. I think we only truly appreciate the greatness we are watching once said fighter or team is retired, etc.

[MANGLER]

Ol school fighters had more fights, more rds, less $, less belts, and less weight classes. People look at the talent of today's fighters and match it against past gr8s, and figuring in the ol school guys fought under tougher circumstances, they assume today's guys ain't up to par. Obviously there's no way to say that 4 sho, and usin that assumption without serious analysis is just wrong. But it does count. It's a lot easier for fighters to rack up multiple belts in multiple divisions and achieve perceived gr8ness nowadays.

[aristotlemoses]

Theres no way to know though how they would hold up.
I'll you what, I don't **** on new fighters. But I would have love to have been alive in past generations.