Why are fighters from the past glorified so much?

[yngwie]

The most important point, those weren't getting much money, they were looking at the guy across the ring like the man who wanted to take the food out of the mouth of their families, the could die right there in the ring.
Jack Dempsey, Jimmy Wilde, Stanley Ketchel, all at 15/16 cleaning bars for a few bucks, fighting without eating days before, fighting 20/30/40 rounds and that toughness remained to more modern eras, 70's/80's even 90's, but as guys like Vasquez, Dela Hoya, Mosley, were retiring, the tough breed was dying with those fighters, today only a few guys are really tough and fearless, without taking anything away from them because this will always be a tough sport.

[i got the keys]

The most important point, those weren't getting much money, they were looking at the guy across the ring like the man who wanted to take the food out of the mouth of their families, the could die right there in the ring.
Jack Dempsey, Jimmy Wilde, Stanley Ketchel, all at 15/16 cleaning bars for a few bucks, fighting without eating days before, fighting 20/30/40 rounds and that toughness remained to more modern eras, 70's/80's even 90's, but as guys like Vasquez, Dela Hoya, Mosley, were retiring, the tough breed was dying with those fighters, today only a few guys are really tough and fearless, without taking anything away from them because this will always be a tough sport.

[Madison Boxing]

I don't think people in the modern day can really fathom what the fighters in the early days had to go through. Think of the racial tension. That alone is a mark of a champion. Fighters went into knowingly hostile territories and continued to do their work.

When it's all said and done, realistically, the modern day fighters don't know the hell those of the past had to go through.

Like....it's IMPOSSIBLE for me or anyone else to try and compare a current welterweight to a guy like Henry Armstrong. If you don't know him, look him up. Over 200 FIGHTS!

Athletes of today have advanced in many things....but looking at some of the greats of the past doing what they did can't explained on a forum........

200 fights and 190 of them were probably against bums who didnt train lol

[DreamerUSA]

200 fights and 190 of them were probably against bums who didnt train lol

Statements like this make it hard for me to take you serious. The guy fought 17 current or former world champions and beat 15 of them in an era when there was one champ. The guys resume is literally a whos who of fighters from his era. The guy in a three year stretch from 1937-1939 fought 53 times losing once. And most were far from bums. Just sit there and actually contemplate that for a moment.

Anyways as to the topic. Most have covered it as it really is'nt one thing, but the one thing I hav'nt really seen mentioned is this. The really old school guys who get **** on by modern day fans because they see they have 20-30 L's, went through a hell of a lot more than fighters today. Newer fans don't realise that back in the day that a lot of black fighters had to take dives, or contracts would stipulate that the only way they could win would be by stopping their opponent. Imagine Mayweather's record if he had to KO guys to win. So yes historians generally give these guys some extra credit and rightfully so imo.

[just the facts]

200 fights and 190 of them were probably against bums who didnt train lol

hardcore g string ball gaggers (like you) should never, ever post about anyone fighting bums.

[nubianpiye]

In all the mythical match ups, or discussions, the modern day fighters are pretty much always considered not a patch on the fighters they are compared to. You then examine there record and theyve lost/gone the distance with absoltue bums yet the top fighters from modern era have no chance against them. For example, recent discussions ive seen are with julian jackson v ggg in terms of power, jackson didnt knock out a guy with a 9-16 record, yet thats okay, imagine if GGG now fought and went distance with someone like that? Another one is toney v GGG, toney struggled against tibieri and lost to thadzi (28-8) yet GGG has no chance against him. This isnt a GGG discussion and the purpose of the thread isnt to debate them particular examples, but they are most recent ive seen.
why is it that fighters from past eras are viewed to be so indestructible, and losses can be brushed aside, yet if someone from this era struggles or loses they get absolutely slaughtered?

People drone on about fighters they have never watched because the want to appear knowledgable.

[Madison Boxing]

People drone on about fighters they have never watched because the want to appear knowledgable.

yeah, pretty much how i see it...

[bojangles1987]

There are far fewer fighters these days, which means less talent, which means less high quality competition, which means fewer fighters forging their skills to the absolute max of their capability because they never have to to compete with large numbers of other great fighters. Then you add in the shrinking money pool which means less money for fighters and fewer good fights because they don't get paid what they want, which means their competition grows even worse.Fewer fighters and less interest has also meant fewer trainers and gyms which means fighters are trained worse than they used to be.

Boxing is not a sport that has improved over the years. That's why fighters from the past are glorified, because they had the competition to create great records worth glorifying. Fighters today don't have that.

[robertzimmerman]

yeah, pretty much how i see it...

Which is exactly what you do you fool.

[bojangles1987]

Forget the legends like Duran, Leonard, Ali, and such. Go watch the high-ranked contenders they fought. Go watch some of tougher defenses Larry Holmes made of the HW title against fighters like Tim Witherspoon. You don't see HW contenders with the kind of skill Witherspoon showed in that fight. Hell, you don't see some of the best HWs in the world show the excellence in basic fundamental skills like footwork, head movement, and parrying that Witherspoon showed in that fight.

There's a reason you don't see that anymore, and that's why past fighters are glorified. The level of skill and talent in boxing has drastically decreased as the sport's popularity and plain number of participants has.