Tweet
I Think this must have been the best era for Heavyweight boxing, with Ali Foreman Frazier Holmes Norton and plenty of other top boxers.
Anyone agree?
Anyone agree?
-
-
Maybe you should consider the 90s with Lewis, Tyson, Holy, Bowe, Foreman, Morrison, Moorer, Rudduck, Tucker, Golota, Tua, Byrd, Ike. All but Byrd could slug and all but Byrd were good sized healthy strong heavies and a lot of them were good boxers too besides having power.Originally posted by Boxclever -
Originally posted by KidBlackie
Good point, When you look at it like that.
Golota though really? Don't think he'd have survived in the 70's, not sure about Moorer either. Fair point though.
Comment
-
totally agree, just a shame i didnt live too see it live.Originally posted by BoxcleverComment
-
An excellent point. I had the privilege of seeing both eras, and I can tell you that even though the 70's had a great crop of heavies, the 90's crop was every bit as good if not better. Guys like Tua, Ruddock, Ike were top notch contenders who match up very well with the 70's contenders like Earnie Shavers or Ken Norton. And even though Ali, Foreman and Frazier are all-time greats, Holy, LL, Tyson and Bowe are right up there too. In fact, you could put any of those 90's champs in the ring with any of the 70's champs and I would give them at least even odds in most cases. (Recognizing that the Ali of the 70's was not the Ali of the 60's too.)Originally posted by KidBlackie
Sometimes people overly glamorize the past, when in fact the good old days are not nearly as old as you think.Comment
-
Originally posted by KidBlackie
I don't agree with you at all with this comment. Out of the people you named, you have three HOF'ers (not including Foreman), Tyson, Holfield and Lewis. The rest of them are media-hyped fighters.
If you consider the styles of those boxers and compare them to a prime Frazier, Norton, Foreman and Shavers, you have several monumentous beatings.
Granted people do over-glamorize the 70's heavies, however only a few of the heavies of the past 15 years could even consider getting in the ring with them, let alone beat them.
People need to consider the facts of fighters, not whether they like them. I personally can't stand Mayweather, however he's the best around today. I can't stand Ali, but he was the best back then.
Think, not feel.Comment
-
I think the 90's was a very good era (especially in the light of the current situation), but to say it was as rich in talent as the 70's is a stretch. The only truly great fighters you've listed were Lewis, Bowe and Holyfield IMO. Even then, Lewis and Holy are the only locks.
The rest of those guys had some championship qualities but lacked the entire package. I don't buy that rubbish that old Foreman was a better fighter than in his youth. He was more relaxed in the ring, but his reflexes had dulled and he was slow as hell. He beat Moorer (when behind at points at the time), but Moorer was a very weak champion who wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway.
On the other hand, in the 70's you had the biggest concentration of great heavyweights of all time, and they were all in their primes (or at least near their primes in Ali's case) for at least some portion of the 1970's.
Thr 90's were very good but they don't compare to the "Golden Age" of heavyweights.Comment
-
the 70's had ali, frazier, norton, foreman, ellis, young, quarry, bonavena, shavers, chuvalo, holmes, and maybe a few others.
the 80's had tyson, holmes, cooney, shavers, cobb, michael spinks, and holyfield.
the 90's had lewis, holyfield, golota, bowe, tyson, byrd, ike, tua, and mercer. morrison and rudduck were exciting, but they ******.
id have to say the best HW era was the 70's.Comment
Comment