Soviet/Eastern European heavyweights dominating 60s/70s era? Myth Busted!

[slimshandy69]

repaorted Lacedup for racism. His hatred for a certain demographic especially of Estern European decent is disgusting.

This guy has gone on record of slating Lomochenko, Vitali,wlad, Golonkin, ruslan,. kovalev etc.

He even hates froch because of his polish roots. Look at his laughable avatar.

[LacedUp]

And to think I almost missed out on this thread! Lucky I went back a bit.

You have highlighted some good US victory examples there Lacey boy, it was a researched effort. Unfortunately a futile one!

Please note that some of the examples you have highlighted (like Ionas Chapulos) never won a European title, he was a replacement.

Now follow this closely...


1960: Italy wins at heavyweight, South Africa 2nd, Soviet bloc 3rd.
Soviet Bloc wins 3x more medals than the USA.

1964: USA (Joe Frazier) wins a close decision at heavyweight, Soviet Bloc 3rd. USSR+Poland win 6x more gold medals than the USA. Soviet bloc wins everything from middleweight to featherweight

1968: USSR wins the most Gold medals. USA (George Foreman) wins at heavyweight. Soviet bloc 2nd.

1972: Cuba wins at heavyweight. Soviet Bloc 2nd

1976: Cuba wins at heavyweight. Soviet Bloc 2nd

1980: USA boycotts the games. Cuba wins at heavyweight. Soviet Bloc 2nd
Superheavyweight Division is established 201+ lbs

1984: Soviet Bloc boycotts the games. USA wins a record 9 gold medals.

1988: Canada (Lennox Lewis) wins at superheavyweight

1992: Cuba, Germany, Italy win everything from superheavyweight to light-welterweight

1996: Soviet Bloc (Wladimir Klitschko) wins at superheavyweight. Cuba and Soviet Bloc win everything from superheavyweight to middleweight

2000: Great Britain (Audley Harrison) wins at superheavyweight, Soviet Bloc 2nd. Cuba (Felix Savon) wins at heavyweight, Soviet Bloc (Sultan Ibragimov) 2nd. Cuba and Soviet Bloc win everything from heavyweight to bantamweight.

2004: Soviet Bloc (Alexander Povetkin) wins at superheavyweight, Cuba (Odlanier Solis) wins at heavyweight, Soviet Bloc 2nd.

2008: Italy wins at superheavyweight, Soviet Bloc (Rakhim Chakhkiev) wins at heavyweight

2012: Great Britain wins at superheavyweight, Soviet Bloc wins at heavyweight and light heavyweight.



The Eastern Bloc was ALWAYS better than the US at boxing- overall!!!

And you already knew this anyway.

Myth busted you say?

Well that's what I would say

Galant effort Elroy.

except that you immediately start talking about things this thread did not discuss. The proposed argument, from you included, was that that specific period in which Ali, Frazier & Foreman dominated heavyweight boxing for 20 years would have been dominated by the soviets had they been allowed to box in the pros.

Absolutely nowhere did I discuss before/after or smaller weights which I see you are trying to cover yourself with. And I did not discuss the Cubans - who also wouldn't have changed much in the heavyweights which has been proven since they turned pro. I am simply discussing the heavyweights from the east who could have challenged those three in their time. The ones that could were all laid out in the amateurs - including a 6'4 230 lbs guy who Frazier knocked out bad - proving he would have no problems against a larger heavyweight from the east.

The Soviets were not always better overall - that's just ridiculous. Many good fighters from the U.S. Quit the amateurs because they needed money immediately - like Larry Holmes. Used to fight for $45 a fight.

The soviets didn't have that option which makes it hard to compare later on. But with those three, it's still absolutely clear that no one from the soviet amateur program could have challenged them.

[LacedUp]

repaorted Lacedup for racism. His hatred for a certain demographic especially of Estern European decent is disgusting.

This guy has gone on record of slating Lomochenko, Vitali,wlad, Golonkin, ruslan,. kovalev etc.

He even hates froch because of his polish roots. Look at his laughable avatar.

You're so off it it's crazy. I suppose you can find at least one quote of mine where I say something racist about any of those? Many of which I consider myself a fan of.

Whilst we're at it.. How many black fighters do you like?

I'll wait for this one..

[ReIoaded]

Back in those days, all the best athletes from the Soviet Union were playing hockey and only the least athletic of the Russians signed up for boxing. This is the most logical explanation for why American fighters were so dominant during that era.

It's been over 40 years and the times have changed. The best Soviet Athletes are now in boxing and are well on their way to total domination of pugilism.

[LacedUp]

Back in those days, all the best athletes from the Soviet Union were playing hockey and only the least athletic of the Russians signed up for boxing. This is the most logical explanation for why American fighters were so dominant during that era.

It's been over 40 years and the times have changed. The best Soviet Athletes are now in boxing and are well on their way to total domination of pugilism.

Interesting argument.

So I guess you would also agree that the best American athletes are in Basketball and american football too?

[Elroy1]

Galant effort Elroy.

except that you immediately start talking about things this thread did not discuss. The proposed argument, from you included, was that that specific period in which Ali, Frazier & Foreman dominated heavyweight boxing for 20 years would have been dominated by the soviets had they been allowed to box in the pros.

Absolutely nowhere did I discuss before/after or smaller weights which I see you are trying to cover yourself with. And I did not discuss the Cubans - who also wouldn't have changed much in the heavyweights which has been proven since they turned pro. I am simply discussing the heavyweights from the east who could have challenged those three in their time. The ones that could were all laid out in the amateurs - including a 6'4 230 lbs guy who Frazier knocked out bad - proving he would have no problems against a larger heavyweight from the east.

The Soviets were not always better overall - that's just ridiculous. Many good fighters from the U.S. Quit the amateurs because they needed money immediately - like Larry Holmes. Used to fight for $45 a fight.

The soviets didn't have that option which makes it hard to compare later on. But with those three, it's still absolutely clear that no one from the soviet amateur program could have challenged them.

Oh

So now it comes to light that we're only focussing on THREE HW's from the past that managed to overcome their Soviet counterparts of the day..

Oh I'm sorry, you see "I" thought that you were kinda using this thread to make some form of US > Soviet boxing thing in GENERAL LOL

Silly me for making that mistake.

20 years right... Let's break that down to actually "3" Olympic games.. THREE focus points where your 3 heroes managed to overcome such adversity. Without analysing anything about these fights, does it not sound valid that maybe at that particular point the best the Americans could send might have just been better? GOOD FOR THEM!

You do the same as always...

- Focus on the narrowest time or genre you can to suit your agenda

- And then try to generalise it across the board.

Well you were proven wrong mate.

So what your claiming is that Joe Frazier, Muhammad Ali and George Foreman managed to conquer their Soviet counterparts. WOW. Does that improve for you there chances against modern day former Soviet boxers (or other European boxers)?? Of course not! The 3 guys they fought, as they were, were NOTHING like Povetkin, Klitschko's, Pulev, Golota or the like and you bloody well know it, and neither were any of their professional opponents!!

If you want me to say well done to them for beating their Soviet counterparts in ONE particular weight class, WHICH WAS NOT EVEN ALWAYS HW (let alone SHW)!, these 3, then you have it, well done!

Had the Soviets been ABLE to have a fully developed boxing industry (with pro) OBVIOUSLY things would be a little different. Viewed holistically, it's basically like you are singing the praises of 3 guys who managed to beat 3 guys from another country who essentially had their hands behind their back.

Once again.. The MOMENT things changed.. The boxing industry flourished there, and your heroes were dethroned.

And moreover, overall (all classes, all Olympics), THEY WERE LOSERS ANYWAY!)

The 3 Soviets that were beaten were likely bigger punch bags than the 3 US ones were! (By comparison to modern boxers).

Joe and Geroge could barely box, and Muhammad was never a technically good boxer really either. If the Soviet's for that particular weight class and for those few Olympics couldn't beat it, then they were no better.

^^^ Problem solved

[ReIoaded]

Interesting argument.

So I guess you would also agree that the best American athletes are in Basketball and american football too?

The best American Athletes are in Swimming and Speed Skating. They would be Michael Phelps and Apollo Ohno.

[LacedUp]

Oh

So now it comes to light that we're only focussing on THREE HW's from the past that managed to overcome their Soviet counterparts of the day..

Oh I'm sorry, you see "I" thought that you were kinda using this thread to make some form of US > Soviet boxing thing in GENERAL LOL

Silly me for making that mistake.

20 years right... Let's break that down to actually "3" Olympic games.. THREE focus points where your 3 heroes managed to overcome such adversity. Without analysing anything about these fights, does it not sound valid that maybe at that particular point the best the Americans could send might have just been better? GOOD FOR THEM!

You do the same as always...

- Focus on the narrowest time or genre you can to suit your agenda

- And then try to generalise it across the board.

Well you were proven wrong mate.

So what your claiming is that Joe Frazier, Muhammad Ali and George Foreman managed to conquer their Soviet counterparts. WOW. Does that improve for you there chances against modern day former Soviet boxers (or other European boxers)?? Of course not! The 3 guys they fought, as they were, were NOTHING like Povetkin, Klitschko's, Pulev, Golota or the like and you bloody well know it, and neither were any of their professional opponents!!

If you want me to say well done to them for beating their Soviet counterparts in ONE particular weight class, WHICH WAS NOT EVEN ALWAYS HW (let alone SHW)!, these 3, then you have it, well done!

Had the Soviets been ABLE to have a fully developed boxing industry (with pro) OBVIOUSLY things would be a little different. Viewed holistically, it's basically like you are singing the praises of 3 guys who managed to beat 3 guys from another country who essentially had their hands behind their back.

Once again.. The MOMENT things changed.. The boxing industry flourished there, and your heroes were dethroned.

And moreover, overall (all classes, all Olympics, they were losers anyway!)

The 3 Soviets that were beaten were likely bigger punch bags than the 3 US ones were! (By comparison to modern boxers).

Joe and Geroge could barely box, and Muhammad was never a technically good boxer really either. If the Soviet's for that particular weight class and for those few Olympics couldn't beat it, then they were no better.

^^^ Problem solved

Yes. That's what this whole thread was about. Did you not care to read the OP? Did you not read the thread title? Or are YOU trying to change the subject to suit your agenda?

I don't know why you wish to take it into today? That's not what I want to discuss, what don't you get about that? I agree that the Klitschko's and Golota were fantastically skilled heavyweights? So what are you trying to say?

You obviously didn't get what this thread was about.

Anyway, I'm glad you are man enough to admit that even if the Soviets were fighting pro in the 60s/70s (which is what this thread was about) - they still would have lost to the greats of that era.

[Elroy1]

Now I consider THAT point behind us (unless you can present something more affronting)..

I have only actually seen the Chapulos fight with Foreman (and know about stuff surrounding it).

Not that it makes any difference but I would like to know if there's any chance you are trying to "FRAUD" us even further by selling stuff that isn't quite revealing of the truth.

I know the Clay fight was staged at LHW which is a bit questionable. What if that Clay had been forced to fight the HW of the time? And I noticed atleast one poster called into question the validity of the win. Could it have been that Clay, the guy who's entire career was basically manufactured also had a gifted ammy one too?

I want to know similar things about the Frazier opponent.

But one of the laughing stock things about something you said surrounds Frazier beating that tall heavy guy.

When I claim that Frazier can't beat a modern superheavy, I mean exactly that!

A trained boxer can beat guys much bigger than himself who can't box nearly as good (duh), but a trained boxer is disadvantaged against a trained boxer larger (also duh).

Compared to a modern HW, Frazier is not a trained boxer! He is not even at current amateur level!

If you took Joe Frazier, trained him for years with modern instruction and pumped him full of steroids the whole time, he could possibly get an SD decision against Kimbo Slice [quoted from one of the objective posters on this site]. That is a fact!

[ReIoaded]

I know the Clay fight was staged at LHW which is a bit questionable. What if that Clay had been forced to fight the HW of the time? And I noticed atleast one poster called into question the validity of the win. Could it have been that Clay, the guy who's entire career was basically manufactured also had a gifted ammy one too?

Clay?

The only people who insisted on calling Ali by the name of Clay were generally in bred hillbilly racists from the deep south who refused to accept or acknowledge the concept of equality.

Or they were Ali's opponents looking to get into his head and we all know you're far too old to have been one of Ali's opponents so you must be the former.