Do you guys agree??

[LoadedWraps]

joe F. if you noticed, i placed joe L.

quick and without reading up on them, what can YOU tell me about the guys from johnsons era ?

They had incredible conditioning and were more active.No ducking back then either, no early stoppages.

[Elroy The Great]

They had incredible conditioning and were more active.No ducking back then either, no early stoppages.

youre quicker than that other guy, thats for sure.

im sure the hw had its share of flubbers. and let me pose this question, would a movie be better if it were 10 hours long ? or would a book be better if it had 20k pages ? 20+ rds....how many were boring/SLOPPY as fnck ?

[Elroy The Great]

people are so quick to place guys theyve NEVER SEEN or seen VERY LITTLE OF. if the guy was written up as the greatest shlt, it just HAD TO BE.

smdh

[Elroy The Great]

You just admitted to not knowing that much about boxing history and yet according to you, Joe Louis and Rocky Marciano don't make the cut

Lol

http://boxrec.com/boxer/1187

or

http://boxrec.com/boxer/168

what say oh worldly fight scholar....

[LoadedWraps]

youre quicker than that other guy, thats for sure.

im sure the hw had its share of flubbers. and let me pose this question, would a movie be better if it were 10 hours long ? or would a book be better if it had 20k pages ? 20+ rds....how many were boring/SLOPPY as fnck ?

Well, what gives you the idea there were boring and/or sloppy rounds and fights?

Boxing isn't like other sports where the most recent history has the most complexity, it's the opposite. The technical aspects of the sport are dying more than they are flourishing and evolving, for reasons that have been discussed before and for reasons that are covered on a historical level, I don't want to derail the thread though.

Is a movie better if it's 10 hours long? Not necessarily, which is what I think your point is, but it can be, it can be an epic.

Movies like Casablanca, BEN-HUR (original) The Godfather aren't "better" than, let's say, the 97 version of Godzilla because they are longer, they are better because of the content, acting, and significance involved.

Personally, as a boxing fan, yes, more rounds = better because more boxing for me. There are exceptions to that of course, like for anything else.

Boxing has always been prizefighting but prizefighting hasn't always been about divas and safety. You can still be a prizefighter and lust for blood, fear no one, duck no one. There is more than one way to the prize, not all are equally as honorable.

When we look at boxing beyond film, all we have are historical accounts of newspapers and such. You might not want to put much weight into that, but if it's all we have, it's all we have.

I'm going to treat such accounts as fact until there is solid evidence otherwise.

There are things we do know: Fights were longer. Fighters were more conditioned. Fighters fought more often. Gloves were thinner. Safety wasn't as much of a concern as it is now. Champions had to be more active. There were waaaay more fighters than today.

That definitely translates to harder competition all around, harder fighters, and many exciting fights through the early eras.

There definitely woulda been less flabby "cans" in the game, and the ones that were around with any kind of success, you can bet they were real killers - you can't really judge a fighter by his appearance anyway.

One of the longest recorded fights (recorded in history, not video) was 47 rounds. There might of been a few rounds "off" from either fighter, but my goodness, to be out there in that heat, on that day, watching 47 rounds of combat between two mortal men, that's awesome. No 69.99+ PPV today will give you that kind of mortal combat. Not one.

[Madison Boxing]

Lewis never got off the canvas to win a fight...he doesn't belong on any list...nor does that scary fragile Russian or whatever that shi.t is.

lennox lewis could arguably be top of that list.

[W1LL]

1.) Muhammad Ali
2.) Lennox Lewis
3.) Larry Holmes
4.) Joe Louis
5.) Rocky Marciano

After that it becomes too hard to decide.

[Elroy The Great]

Well, what gives you the idea there were boring and/or sloppy rounds and fights?

Boxing isn't like other sports where the most recent history has the most complexity, it's the opposite. The technical aspects of the sport are dying more than they are flourishing and evolving, for reasons that have been discussed before and for reasons that are covered on a historical level, I don't want to derail the thread though.

Is a movie better if it's 10 hours long? Not necessarily, which is what I think your point is, but it can be, it can be an epic.

Movies like Casablanca, BEN-HUR (original) The Godfather aren't "better" than, let's say, the 97 version of Godzilla because they are longer, they are better because of the content, acting, and significance involved.

Personally, as a boxing fan, yes, more rounds = better because more boxing for me. There are exceptions to that of course, like for anything else.

Boxing has always been prizefighting but prizefighting hasn't always been about divas and safety. You can still be a prizefighter and lust for blood, fear no one, duck no one. There is more than one way to the prize, not all are equally as honorable.

When we look at boxing beyond film, all we have are historical accounts of newspapers and such. You might not want to put much weight into that, but if it's all we have, it's all we have.

I'm going to treat such accounts as fact until there is solid evidence otherwise.

There are things we do know: Fights were longer. Fighters were more conditioned. Fighters fought more often. Gloves were thinner. Safety wasn't as much of a concern as it is now. Champions had to be more active. There were waaaay more fighters than today.

That definitely translates to harder competition all around, harder fighters, and many exciting fights through the early eras.

There definitely woulda been less flabby "cans" in the game, and the ones that were around with any kind of success, you can bet they were real killers - you can't really judge a fighter by his appearance anyway.

One of the longest recorded fights (recorded in history, not video) was 47 rounds. There might of been a few rounds "off" from either fighter, but my goodness, to be out there in that heat, on that day, watching 47 rounds of combat between two mortal men, that's awesome. No 69.99+ PPV today will give you that kind of mortal combat. Not one.

might be TL/DR.....

exactly, boxing isnt like any other sport. most sports requires some form of education/scholarship. with boxing, any schlub with the ability to have his hands wrapped and laced can be a boxer. the more financially desperate a guy is, the more tempting boxing becomes.

back in the day, boxers didnt fight 100x a year because they wanted to. they HAD to. motel bills werent going to pay themselves. again, licensing ?!?!? can you take a shot to the chops ? youre licensed. rules ? equipment ? technique ? fairness ?

people say our gen has been filled with bad dec and corruption. its a well known fact that the mob controlled boxing. nobody got a win or a chance at a title unless they said so. and judges better play along or end up with the fishes. taking dives was commonplace.

everything back in the day was supposed to be better. their ''technology'' was unsurpassed. we know differently now, dont we. the historians back then had nothing really to compare it to. of course their version of ''greats'' will be written up as such. if those historians were alive NOW, theyd no doubt rewrite their love stories.

not saying none of those guys were worth the write ups, its just that WE so blindly accept it. cmon, when you look at those guys with the ''put em up, put em up.'' stance, do you not rofl ? and the wildness.....and jumping on a guy as soon as they got off the floor....

the hw div is notorious for having the most blubbery guys in boxing, obviously. they dont have to control their weight. we get to see EVERY hw of today. they are bigger, stronger and faster. i would much rather have guys fight as fresh a condition as possible and having no limits or crazy limits isnt the way. imho, no matter how great a movie/book is, nothing sucks more than having it drag out.

im more than likely the dumbest **** here but i refuse to be force fed shlt just to blend in.