Heavyweight Evolution: 90's/Current eras vs the old days. No comparison.

[billeau2]

I noticed a lot of posters will often nit pick a lot of weaker/out of shape Heavys from the current era and say 'see HW Boxing has not evolved.' Why not use the true standards of the word modern? Why not use the 90's fighters and throw in K2 as the model of boxing evolution:

Think about this: Do you guys honestly think that Jack Johnson, Rocky Marciano, Jack Dempsey, Joe Frazier, Jerry Quarry, Cleveland Williams and a bunch of light heavyweights can beat the likes of

Lennox Lewis, Rid**** Bowe, Wladimir and Vitali Klitschko, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, Ray Mercer, David Tua, Ike Ibuebechi,.... etc.. It's absurd.

David Tua would have torn the 20's apart... as would Ike. With the exception of Ali and Foreman.. everyone else from the top 30 would have been massive under dogs against the top 30 of the 90's/current era.

Let's stop using examples like Chris Arreloa and say 'see Heavyweights did not evolve'.. Let's start pointing out the 230+ Pound skilled modernized Heavys of the 90's era.. and see what the gap really is.

Heres another nit to pick you nitwit.... Evolution implies either a biological change in human beings due to adapting to the environment....usually taking many many generations, thousands and thousands of years....or some great consciousness raising experience making a large difference in the very essence of the activity.

For example, Football was once played collegiate level by amateur athletes in clubs at universities...today the steriod doping super human athletes that play the game are specialized per position, are in the top percentage of athletes for size, strength and intelligence..... comparing Peyton Manning to even Kenny Stabler we would see a total different class of athlete. So we might say the game of football has evolved to produce teams that would trounce teams in the past.

No such event has occured for boxing. there really is not any proof that the average size of a heavyweight has moved from just north of 200 pounds, or that fighters are better, more skilled, faster, a better class of athlete, than in the past. Thats a fact....based on the word of people who have been around in the different eras and worked with the differnt fighters.

This point about boxers now and then gets brought up time and time again, always with some angle, be it size (proven not to be the factor people think it is), evolution (a misnomer), or a characterization such as "guys back then were tougher, or guys today are stronger, etc."

The truth is that the knowledge and aprenticeing of a fighter is inferior today as compared to the past. Guys do not spend the time to learn the craft and there are less great trainers around. You see it in the footwork primarily and that is an opinion of mine.

[bojangles1987]

Hey Bo, you realize you're being trolled by an alt right?

I can't help it. I have unused arguing energy from all the Klitschko threads the past week. Everyone else was saying the stuff I wanted to say.

Besides, a lot of people who say this seem to believe it.

[Poet682006]

today the steriod doping super human athletes that play the game are specialized per position, are in the top percentage of athletes for size, strength and intelligence..... comparing Peyton Manning to even Kenny Stabler we would see a total different class of athlete. So we might say the game of football has evolved to produce teams that would trounce teams in the past.

So what happens when you take away their PEDs? :chuckle9:

[billeau2]

Than why are you listing Frazier, Quarry, and Williams to begin with? You were clearly implying they are small.

Only one of those guys fought in the 20s anyway, so again why are you talking about the 20s? The only guy you listed that fought before the 20s was Jack Johnson. Most of them fought in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. The best fighter in the 20s was a 210 pound Joe Louis who would slaughter most the division today, maybe everyone in the division today.

I didn't list failed heavyweights from today. I listed successful fighters who were beating most of the division. Who are all these great 230+ pound fighters today? Wlad, Vitali, Lewis, who else?

Just had to add to this: Lets remember that Wlad and Vitali are brothers and practically twins. So in a sense that makes the list smaller yet.

To anyone with eyes there are heavyweights of all sizes north of 200 around, just like it has been for a while now.

[Cutthroat]

Big muscles doesn't mean you can hit hard or outbox your opponent, have you learned nothing from watching guys like Bradely, Lacy, Pavlik, Ward, Golovkin, Adamek, Chambers, Byrd, RJJ, Kovalev etc.?


This dude KTFO of Wlad and even rocked Vitali before he punched himself out, just look at that ripped body, those huge muscles!








Ali-Frazier went 15 rounds in 110 degree heat with close to 100% humidity when they fought back in 1975, this was an all out war as well. These men weren't fighting in air conditioned hotels punching themselves out in 6 rounds, they were fighting outside with the sun on their back, pure heat.

What those men did was absolutely incredible, how many guys do you know could do that today?

[Poet682006]

I can't help it. I have unused arguing energy from all the Klitschko threads the past week. Everyone else was saying the stuff I wanted to say.

Besides, a lot of people who say this seem to believe it.

It's been a bad weekend for the Klitlickers :chuckle9:

[billeau2]

So what happens when you take away their PEDs? :chuckle9:

Thats the difference between the environment causing a change and people using an innovation to game the environment.

Thats precisely why it is not evolution. The Scandinavian countries invented organic chemistry before the second world war....German pilots took amphetimines and could fly many more missions accordingly....does/did that make them better pilots?

edit; I should say here that we use the term evolution in the second sense, namely as a major change or progress in an activity, but technically this is not really evolution.

[MuhammadLewis]

Thats the difference between the environment causing a change and people using an innovation to game the environment.

Thats precisely why it is not evolution. The Scandinavian countries invented organic chemistry before the second world war....German pilots took amphetimines and could fly many more missions accordingly....does/did that make them better pilots?

Peds don't make you stronger.

[Poet682006]

Thats the difference between the environment causing a change and people using an innovation to game the environment.

Thats precisely why it is not evolution. The Scandinavian countries invented organic chemistry before the second world war....German pilots took amphetimines and could fly many more missions accordingly....does/did that make them better pilots?

edit; I should say here that we use the term evolution in the second sense, namely as a major change or progress in an activity, but technically this is not really evolution.

Not to mention that it gets used to imply improvement when, in fact, what is being described is merely different rather than better. The vast majority of differences are sideways moves rather than advancements.

[Poet682006]

Peds don't make you stronger.

:hahahaha9: That has got to be the dumbest post I've read on here in 7 years and that's saying something :hahahaha9: