The oldschool of boxing is overrated

[cupocity303]

Today's boxers practice what yesterday's boxers preached.

Guys like Dempsey/Marcianno had a lot to say on boxing strategy but never actually carried it out. They'd say something about holding your stance in place and staying on steady feet, but if you watch their tapes most of them pretty much fall over their own feet swinging for the hills. Fecking Wilder looks like a technician compared to some of those guys.

Today's boxers get scolded if they break stance, lean into a punch too much or lower their guard. The old timers look like they were trying to hold their pants up while breaking down a door with their head.

Precisely.

So boxing professionals who saw everyone from Greb to Armstrong to Joe Louis to JRR to Ali and say that Greb is a TOP 5 of that period - and you think its BS because of a promotional video. Funny how cross-training, kettlebells, core training has come back to the forefront.

Imagine a 20 year old starting to box professionally in 1915; retires at 35 in 1930 and works as a ring man - trainer for another 40 years. The man has seen a lot of talent. A lot of guys that saw all the greats consider Greb to be among them.

His ranking is irrelevant. I wasn't talking about his resume of accomplishments, but his in-ring abilities. See Croz's post above which sheds further light on the matter.

[Bushidō]

No disrespect to the old boys, they're warriors, but as I study their resumes, they really DOES seem less impressive than the Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfields of modern times.

Frazier: He had 1 great win, Ali. To who he lost the two rematches. His second best win Quarry, a guy with a very flawed resume, and if anyone today had a loss like the one he Frazier had to Foreman back then, it would be considered "exposed".

Jerry Quarry: Lost to journeymen right and left and his best win was Earnie Shavers...

Earnie Shavers: He lost to journeymen right and left, got knocked out in round 1 by Quarry...

Rocky Marciano: His KO percentage and undefeated record seems impressive, but he got no great wins at all, we could hail Deontay Wilder today like many are hailing Marciano...

Just some examples. It's as if the old fighters are being hyped a lot to make each other seem better by beating each other. But we had guys like Lewis in modern times with far better resumes and more clear top quality wins.

I just don't get why so many prefer oldschool boxing, although yes, Ali and Foreman would both probably be on top today, but guys like Frazier, Shavers and Quarry would probably not even beat Holyfield... I'm trying to be realistic here.

Muhammad Ali could fight any fighter with any style. The fact that Frazier beat Ali was amazing. I think Frazier would have beat the crap out of Rocky Marciano..

[them_apples]

No disrespect to the old boys, they're warriors, but as I study their resumes, they really DOES seem less impressive than the Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfields of modern times.

Frazier: He had 1 great win, Ali. To who he lost the two rematches. His second best win Quarry, a guy with a very flawed resume, and if anyone today had a loss like the one he Frazier had to Foreman back then, it would be considered "exposed".

Jerry Quarry: Lost to journeymen right and left and his best win was Earnie Shavers...

Earnie Shavers: He lost to journeymen right and left, got knocked out in round 1 by Quarry...

Rocky Marciano: His KO percentage and undefeated record seems impressive, but he got no great wins at all, we could hail Deontay Wilder today like many are hailing Marciano...

Just some examples. It's as if the old fighters are being hyped a lot to make each other seem better by beating each other. But we had guys like Lewis in modern times with far better resumes and more clear top quality wins.

I just don't get why so many prefer oldschool boxing, although yes, Ali and Foreman would both probably be on top today, but guys like Frazier, Shavers and Quarry would probably not even beat Holyfield... I'm trying to be realistic here.

you havent done your homework lol. Professional boxing looks more like the ams these days. Back in the day the pro game was huge, lots of great trainers. fighters punched with power, both hands for 15 rounds, slipped and voided shots by rolling and riding. not to mention how hungry they were back then, margarito wouldnt have been a standout, they were all like him.

[MisterHardtop]

No disrespect to the old boys, they're warriors, but as I study their resumes, they really DOES seem less impressive than the Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfields of modern times.

Frazier: He had 1 great win, Ali. To who he lost the two rematches. His second best win Quarry, a guy with a very flawed resume, and if anyone today had a loss like the one he Frazier had to Foreman back then, it would be considered "exposed".

Jerry Quarry: Lost to journeymen right and left and his best win was Earnie Shavers...

Earnie Shavers: He lost to journeymen right and left, got knocked out in round 1 by Quarry...

Rocky Marciano: His KO percentage and undefeated record seems impressive, but he got no great wins at all, we could hail Deontay Wilder today like many are hailing Marciano...

Just some examples. It's as if the old fighters are being hyped a lot to make each other seem better by beating each other. But we had guys like Lewis in modern times with far better resumes and more clear top quality wins.

I just don't get why so many prefer oldschool boxing, although yes, Ali and Foreman would both probably be on top today, but guys like Frazier, Shavers and Quarry would probably not even beat Holyfield... I'm trying to be realistic here.

It's wrong to lump the likes of Quarry and Shavers with Frazier and Marciano. The former were tough as nails contenders, especially Shavers, who I think would be a top 10 heavy in the modern game and probably stop Wladimir. Having said that, watching them in the 70s, no one ever mentioned them as great, simply as guys who could be tough opponents for great champions.

Shavers is largely famed due to his power and his fight with Ali, when he gave an almost shot champion the fright of a life time. It is probably Ali's last truly great performance and really should have signaled his retirement.

Frazier is an undoubted great, I've been over this before so I won't bore anyone.

[Richard Wadd]

Today's era is so great and better than before

Before there were technical ******s like George Benton (no wonder he never won the title), Harold Johnson (Archie Moore's personal whipping boy), Joe Louise (left his jab out there too long and low), jersey Joe Walcott (no wonder he lost 30 times), Ezzard Charles (how many times did he lose? 40?), Jose Napoles, sugar ray leotard (runs like a girl), Marvin Hagler (confused on how to fight so be fought lefty and righty).

Nowadays we have technical genius:

Waldo Klitschko: masterful inside and outside boxer.

Amir khan: amazing footwork and balance, he should walk the tightrope at the circus. He doesn't throw nonsense arm flurries with no power like Leonard or Robinson. He is accurate and throws combinations with full power and is fluid.

Tyson fury: one of the many contender nowadays who's technical skills show a vast evolution and improvement from the past

Tim Bradley: throws an amazing straight right hand with full leverage

David hayemaker: great haymaker right hand. Great balance and fluidity when he throws combos. Also has immense stamina. Rid**** Bowe wished he had his workrate and stamina. Robinson quit in a fight because he was tired. So did Jack Johnson. Did Haye ever quit because he was tired? I think not

[Layzie Kidd]

Not really. Boxers used to fight, actually hit each other with force. There was more variety, more different styles.

Now a days all everyone does is dillydally for points and poke each other with jabs. Same styles, same fights, nothing exciting. You need to go below the 60's and appreciate the fighters that came before.


I also just noticed the OP got banned after writing this. Made me lol a little bit.

[Heru]

Skill usually doesn't impress the uneducated... Talent is the be all end all...

You can see and acknowledge speed... it impresses. Skills? Unless they're coupled with a talent don't.

Until people actually understand (whether through experience or thoughtful observance), they have little clue how to judge or even consciously notice what skills they're witnessing.

Generally, today's fighters are probably more talented than old school fighters, but the lack of skill most of these fighters possess is a glaring hole in their arsenal that skill exploits. Devon, Klitschko's, Khan, and most of the other top fighters that have amateur experience are oblivious to inside fighting. It might not have taken 15+ fights for Kotelnik, Purrity, and Prescott level "accidents" to happen.

[croz]

Skill usually doesn't impress the uneducated... Talent is the be all end all...

You can see and acknowledge speed... it impresses. Skills? Unless they're coupled with a talent don't.

Until people actually understand (whether through experience or thoughtful observance), they have little clue how to judge or even consciously notice what skills they're witnessing.

Generally, today's fighters are probably more talented than old school fighters, but the lack of skill most of these fighters possess is a glaring hole in their arsenal that skill exploits. Devon, Klitschko's, Khan, and most of the other top fighters that have amateur experience are oblivious to inside fighting. It might not have taken 15+ fights for Kotelnik, Purrity, and Prescott level "accidents" to happen.

Wlad is a perfect example of a fighter with strong technical ability whose talents go under appreciated. Bradley is another, with most people failing to notice that he actually dodges a lot of those punches that look like they've landed.

Boxers don't have to fight an inside game when they've adapted their fighting style to work around it. A lot of boxers just aren't comfortable on the inside, and it doesn't make sense for them to fight their opponents game when they can just as easily get out of it.

[croz]

you havent done your homework lol. Professional boxing looks more like the ams these days. Back in the day the pro game was huge, lots of great trainers. fighters punched with power, both hands for 15 rounds, slipped and voided shots by rolling and riding. not to mention how hungry they were back then, margarito wouldnt have been a standout, they were all like him.

The ams were sloppy as **** back then. We know this because the vids are on youtube and they look sloppy as ****. Even Clay's gold medal win was pretty damn sloppy.

Okay, so first you say they were smarter fighters then you say they were all like Margarito, who is a tough brawler with little boxing IQ. Which is it?

Problem here is fans like you who like to suck off the old timers but outright ignore everything the new guys do. Hell even the women are coming up to speed today. But again that's another case where people like you really have trouble seeing the improvements because you're too set in your ways.

[Richard Wadd]

this thread is great, filled with gems of knowledge and high comedy.