The reason why 35 + year old boxers are still finding success in boxing is...

[Ryn0]

I think you're underestimating the amount of older fighters there were in previous years....

Hopkins and Martinez both got late starts in the sport, they didn't take the early punishment and they haven't had the wear and tear that even some 29-30 year old fighters have.

Archie Moore won the LHW title at 39 I believe not 100% but look it up, I know Ray Robinson beat Carmen Basilo at 39 for the MW title, Duran beat Barkley for the MW title at 38 I think.

These are just off the top of my head cause they were quite big fights, but I know there are many many more, if I went further back or looked into it. I think what you're saying is only the case in the HW division where the talent pool is shallow.

In America the talent pool is shallow at the moment, but boxing is thriving in other countries like places in Eastern Europe, UK, Mexico, PR, Argentina, Japan and even overlooked countries like Columbia.

[Tobi.G]

It think it also has something to do with the number of fights today's fighters have when compared to the other generation's.

Henry armstrong had 180 fights and the guy retired in his early 30s.

Compare that to the average number of fights today's boxers have, and its obvious they fought less, thus receive less damage and are more logically able to fight longer.

It also has something to do with experience! Hopkins has over 70 fights, much of them on champion level, and still work ethic and will to win and great training, no joung Boxer with 20-25 pro fights could ever beat this man simply because he has no experience. The fighters today dont fight often enough and you barely see fighters today with over 50 fights, but its an advantage to have so many fights, IF you dont take to much punishment in the fights and take care of your body and fitness.
And Hopkins only lost to Taylor because it was the end of his middleweight career because he was to drained.