What's up with older "legends" consistently fighting cans?

[croz]

Go over any of their records and you'll find some horrendous fights filling up the bulk of their records even in the prime of their careers. Here are some examples below but there are some god awful mismatches here. Rocky Marcianno makes Pac vs Mosley look like gold. If Floyd and Manny tried getting away with this stuff today they'd be skinned alive.

For example:
John L Sullivan, Alf Greenfield 3 wins 2 losses

Rocky fighting Harold Mitchell - 3 wins 13 losses
Joe Louis fighting Johnny Davis - 3 wins 3 losses
Jack Dempsey, Jack Moran - 2 wins 6 losses
Tony Galento existed
Max Baer vs Big Ed Murphy, 2 wins 1 loss
Willie Pep, Kid Campeche 8 wins 18 losses

There is not a single top boxer today choosing fights as horrendous as these during the prime of their careers. As bad as the Klitschko match making might be nothing they have done even cuts close to these.

Would you respect Mayweather if he started fighting guys like this? If not then why are these guys so blindly respected today?

[res]

Go over any of their records and you'll find some horrendous fights filling up the bulk of their records even in the prime of their careers. Here are some examples below but there are some god awful mismatches here. Rocky Marcianno makes Pac vs Mosley look like gold. If Floyd and Manny tried getting away with this stuff today they'd be skinned alive.

For example:
John L Sullivan, Alf Greenfield 3 wins 2 losses
SRR fighting Gaylord Barnes, a man with 6 wins and 25 losses
Rocky fighting Harold Mitchell - 3 wins 13 losses
Joe Louis fighting Johnny Davis - 3 wins 3 losses
Jack Dempsey, Jack Moran - 2 wins 6 losses
Tony Galento existed
Max Baer vs Big Ed Murphy, 2 wins 1 loss
Willie Pep, Kid Campeche 8 wins 18 losses

There is not a single top boxer today choosing fights as horrendous as these during the prime of their careers. As bad as the Klitschko match making might be nothing they have done even cuts close to these.

Would you respect Mayweather if he started fighting guys like this? If not then why are these guys so blindly respected today?

That's because Floyd and Manny fight 1 to 2 times a year. SRR fought as much as 20 times a year.

[TheGreatA]

If Mayweather fought 19 times a year (see Ray Robinson in 1950), people would not mind him fighting a "can" every now and then. One of Mayweather's tougher fights was against a journeyman in Emmanuel Augustus.

Whitaker and Chavez fought "cans" every now and then at their peak, who really cares? They fought a very high level of competition nonetheless.

It's not like people bring up the fact that Ray Robinson beat Gaylord Barnes as proof that he was the greatest of all time.

[croz]

That's because Floyd and Manny fight 1 to 2 times a year. SRR fought as much as 20 times a year.

If Mayweather fought 19 times a year (see Ray Robinson in 1950), people would not mind him fighting a "can" every now and then. One of Mayweather's tougher fights was against a journeyman in Emmanuel Augustus.

Whitaker and Chavez fought "cans" every now and then at their peak, who really cares? They fought a very high level of competition nonetheless.

It's not like people bring up the fact that Ray Robinson beat Gaylord Barnes as proof that he was the greatest of all time.

and the other guys? Ray Robinson doesn't reflect everyone.

[kendom]

It has to do with the nature of boxing back then. Boxers kept fit by fighting often, because there was more competition and fighters were paid less they had to fight more often, and in between having to fight legitimate contenders, they would fight week in, week out in "keep busy" fights in order to make extra money, they werent going to turn down the chance of a good payday if they had one. For example Sugar Ray Robinson fought middleweight puncher Artie Levine six weeks before his fight with Tommy Bell for the welterweight championship in December 1946, 5 days earlier he had fought Cecil Harris. These were "keep busy" fights that guaranteed good paydays. Hence why some of the old timers have fighters with dodgy resumes on their records. Doesnt matter because they still fought a ridiculous amount of great fighters.

[DAN916]

Also back then if you had a few losses you still wasnt a bum or washed up or done or any of this other childish shlt

[kendom]

and the other guys? Ray Robinson doesn't reflect everyone.

He reflects the nature of boxing back then. Same thing can be applied to the others

[Optimistic]

If Mayweather fought 19 times a year (see Ray Robinson in 1950), people would not mind him fighting a "can" every now and then. One of Mayweather's tougher fights was against a journeyman in Emmanuel Augustus.

Whitaker and Chavez fought "cans" every now and then at their peak, who really cares? They fought a very high level of competition nonetheless.

It's not like people bring up the fact that Ray Robinson beat Gaylord Barnes as proof that he was the greatest of all time.

^^^^^^

/Thread.

[kendom]

Also back then if you had a few losses you still wasnt a bum or washed up or done or any of this other childish shlt

Exactly boxing fans weren't too obsessed about losses back then because they knew that it came with the territory with fighting good fighters so often, it would just have been seen as an "unlucky night". Ppl underestimate the magnitude of going 90 fights unbeaten fighting that often, ppl criticise Robinson for draws but its incredible that with that work schedule he never lost.

[-jose-]

If Mayweather fought 19 times a year (see Ray Robinson in 1950), people would not mind him fighting a "can" every now and then. One of Mayweather's tougher fights was against a journeyman in Emmanuel Augustus.

Whitaker and Chavez fought "cans" every now and then at their peak, who really cares? They fought a very high level of competition nonetheless.

It's not like people bring up the fact that Ray Robinson beat Gaylord Barnes as proof that he was the greatest of all time.

^^^^^^

/Thread.

!Agree!!!!