What makes 60 years ago the cut off line? Did anything significant change boxing so much during that period in time that the fighters suddenly got better from that point onwards? I don't think so.
You wouldn't pick a 100m runner from the 80's to beat Usain Bolt, yet it's very hard to argue that today's line-up would beat the early 80's line-up in boxing. Obviously the "evolution" of sports hasn't affected boxing the same way as other sports, seemingly.
I have a difficult time comparing the old timers of the late 1800's and 1900's to today's fighters, with some exceptions. The 1920's and 30's were somewhat of a transitional period with fighters getting adjusted to the modern boxing rules. Less wrestling involved, more activity, techniques improving, shorter fights. By the 1940's, the art was nearly perfect as evidenced by the likes of Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Harold Johnson, Sugar Ray Robinson and others who fought around the era.
You wouldn't pick a 100m runner from the 80's to beat Usain Bolt, yet it's very hard to argue that today's line-up would beat the early 80's line-up in boxing. Obviously the "evolution" of sports hasn't affected boxing the same way as other sports, seemingly.
I have a difficult time comparing the old timers of the late 1800's and 1900's to today's fighters, with some exceptions. The 1920's and 30's were somewhat of a transitional period with fighters getting adjusted to the modern boxing rules. Less wrestling involved, more activity, techniques improving, shorter fights. By the 1940's, the art was nearly perfect as evidenced by the likes of Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Harold Johnson, Sugar Ray Robinson and others who fought around the era.
Comment