Will people ever STOP OVERRATING old primitive era boxers with little skill?

[pesticid]

not funny at all and why say those 2 names when we can compare the whole eras of pep and duran and they look trash compared to fult and haney

LOL, you really believe that. Haney and Fulton look like skill-less chickens compared to Duran and Pepp. What you talking about? Shut up and listen for a change

[billeau2]

I just got finished reading a RING MAGAZINE article from a few years in degust, for several different reasons. One being how ring magazine and many boxing fans/journalist/critiques, disregard the EYE TEST.

For example, this particular had Jack Dempsey as the 5th greatest heavyweight of all time . Dempsey in his prime was 190 pounds, had no skill (neither did his opponents) and would get CRUSHED by an average amateur middleweight of today?

I recall one idiot (FROM THIS MESSAGE BOARD) saying how fighters were so great back then "because they fought 30-40 rounds". The reason they were able to fight all those rounds was because they didn't do anything but circle each other and hold. If you fight 30 rounds in a Boxing match that means your not doing anything.

Logic gets thrown out the window when it comes to old primitive boxers.

Will people ever stop overrating old fighters from the past?

There are people who automatically favor either opinion with no understanding, like you. To use the eye test you have to understand what you are looking at. Your the idiot that looks under a microscope for the first time and proclaims " I don't see no stinking amebas!" Yeah well... You have to know what you are looking at.

[Ascended]

LOL, you really believe that. Haney and Fulton look like skill-less chickens compared to Duran and Pepp. What you talking about? Shut up and listen for a change

No I don't believe anything you meant what you think saying Duran and pep moved better thats fiction in your head no video shows that

the real pep and Duran moved like I said
I wont ask you to prove me wrong cause I asked you crazy idiots since last year and you cant it doesnt exist those dudes using advances in movement like they did in 70s-90s

like anybody can see those dudes were trash compared they move like toilet and were stiff like your really crazy get glasses and then I'll talk to you agian no time for trolls

[The D3vil]

Damn who is the woman in your signature?

Devin Haney's future sister in law, Crystal Westbrooks

[!! Shawn]

I just got finished reading a RING MAGAZINE article from a few years in degust, for several different reasons. One being how ring magazine and many boxing fans/journalist/critiques, disregard the EYE TEST.

For example, this particular had Jack Dempsey as the 5th greatest heavyweight of all time . Dempsey in his prime was 190 pounds, had no skill (neither did his opponents) and would get CRUSHED by an average amateur middleweight of today?

I recall one idiot (FROM THIS MESSAGE BOARD) saying how fighters were so great back then "because they fought 30-40 rounds". The reason they were able to fight all those rounds was because they didn't do anything but circle each other and hold. If you fight 30 rounds in a Boxing match that means your not doing anything.

Logic gets thrown out the window when it comes to old primitive boxers.

Will people ever stop overrating old fighters from the past?

While the old time rankings are ridiculous, it was hardly the same sport. Fighting in old school 6 ounce horse hair gloves that made blocking punches slightly less painful than getting hit flush was a completely different sport to what we have now with all these big cushy gloves.

There were no neutral corner rules, you could just stand over a fighter and hit him as soon as he got up again.

When you are talking about these many many round fights, the rounds only ended when one guy was knocked down so saying nothing happened when a rounded literally didnt end without a knockdown is really ignorant.

You are also talking about weighins in the ring before the bout.

Some of the old fighters were truly great. That henry armstrong was able to hold and defend the featherweight, lightweight, and welterweight titles simultaneously in the one title era with much fewer weight classes, is a feat thats probably unmatched, considering he also almost added the middleweight title to his trinket list, as he had already beaten the current middleweight champion before, but the title fight was scored a draw. Add in that after he stopped bouncing around to defend everything he ended his welterweight tittle run with 18 defenses. Which.... still stands to this day as the longest championship reign at welterweight.

Yeah some of the old guys were legit.

Some of them were sideshow acts or just tough and unsophisticated, but there are plenty of guys that you can see on tape that were every it as sophisticated as todays fighters in skill and technique.

[Roadblock]

While the old time rankings are ridiculous, it was hardly the same sport. Fighting in old school 6 ounce horse hair gloves that made blocking punches slightly less painful than getting hit flush was a completely different sport to what we have now with all these big cushy gloves.

There were no neutral corner rules, you could just stand over a fighter and hit him as soon as he got up again.

When you are talking about these many many round fights, the rounds only ended when one guy was knocked down so saying nothing happened when a rounded literally didnt end without a knockdown is really ignorant.

You are also talking about weighins in the ring before the bout.

Some of the old fighters were truly great. That henry armstrong was able to hold and defend the featherweight, lightweight, and welterweight titles simultaneously in the one title era with much fewer weight classes, is a feat thats probably unmatched, considering he also almost added the middleweight title to his trinket list, as he had already beaten the current middleweight champion before, but the title fight was scored a draw. Add in that after he stopped bouncing around to defend everything he ended his welterweight tittle run with 18 defenses. Which.... still stands to this day as the longest championship reign at welterweight.

Yeah some of the old guys were legit.

Some of them were sideshow acts or just tough and unsophisticated, but there are plenty of guys that you can see on tape that were every it as sophisticated as todays fighters in skill and technique.

Big cushy gloves, that tells me you never been hit by them lol, the competition back then was not near the average comp of today, the technique was full of flaws that would be exploited by today's top guys, its easy to see the Jack Johnson style would be killed today, but what the average don't see is the gap in between then and now, that gap was still evolving and is still inferior too today's teachings.

Mans courage is the same as a 100 yrs ago, but training and sports science is a world away, you talk of Armstrong because of what he did, but you confuse the task with the ability of today, it wont be done today because the quality is too strong, it's not because he was better than the top fighters of these eras, he didn't have to fight technical super conditioned killers he would have to beat today. Ive always said the average fan is all about the hype and titles they miss a lot of the finer aspects of the sport.

[nghtmr111]

Devin Haney's future sister in law, Crystal Westbrooks

You're still the ***king man for having Arthur Lee as your avatar! I'm an acquaintance of some dude who use to be friends with him back in the 80s (or was it the 90s?). He recalls driving Lee to meet up with some dude who owed him money/crack, and beat the **** out of him.

He said he tried crack for the first time with Arthur Lee

[Ascended]

Big cushy gloves, that tells me you never been hit by them lol, the competition back then was not near the average comp of today, the technique was full of flaws that would be exploited by today's top guys, its easy to see the Jack Johnson style would be killed today, but what the average don't see is the gap in between then and now, that gap was still evolving and is still inferior too today's teachings.

Mans courage is the same as a 100 yrs ago, but training and sports science is a world away, you talk of Armstrong because of what he did, but you confuse the task with the ability of today, it wont be done today because the quality is too strong, it's not because he was better than the top fighters of these eras, he didn't have to fight technical super conditioned killers he would have to beat today. Ive always said the average fan is all about the hype and titles they miss a lot of the finer aspects of the sport.

How is that when crazy idiots say Joe louis was the most skilled yet missing mutiple advances in movement they had in 70s-90s

I even seen idiots say jack would beat lennox a man he never would touch

Like that crazy idiot shawn lied without no problem saying how it was people who fought like a ali Frazier lennox and mutiple others from 70s-90s when we have video proving thats a blatant lie

[Ascended]

While the old time rankings are ridiculous, it was hardly the same sport. Fighting in old school 6 ounce horse hair gloves that made blocking punches slightly less painful than getting hit flush was a completely different sport to what we have now with all these big cushy gloves.

There were no neutral corner rules, you could just stand over a fighter and hit him as soon as he got up again.

When you are talking about these many many round fights, the rounds only ended when one guy was knocked down so saying nothing happened when a rounded literally didnt end without a knockdown is really ignorant.

You are also talking about weighins in the ring before the bout.

Some of the old fighters were truly great. That henry armstrong was able to hold and defend the featherweight, lightweight, and welterweight titles simultaneously in the one title era with much fewer weight classes, is a feat thats probably unmatched, considering he also almost added the middleweight title to his trinket list, as he had already beaten the current middleweight champion before, but the title fight was scored a draw. Add in that after he stopped bouncing around to defend everything he ended his welterweight tittle run with 18 defenses. Which.... still stands to this day as the longest championship reign at welterweight.

Yeah some of the old guys were legit.

Some of them were sideshow acts or just tough and unsophisticated, but there are plenty of guys that you can see on tape that were every it as sophisticated as todays fighters in skill and technique.

Its lots of guys back then who were as skilled as a ali Frazier lennox and others name them i wanna know who used as much movement and advances with good tech and that means from 70s-90s name the boxers since you said it existed and that means the exact movements they used name the fighters

[Apollo7]

The 70s and 90s are known as the "golden generations" because popular Americans dominated in those eras.

Ali had a lot of technical flaws and was overreliant on his athleticism. Thus why he turned into a punching bag in the 70s.

Byrd had a nice style, very slick for a HW because he was a blown-up LHW. Old era boxers struggled with southpaws far worse than him.

Foreman was out-clinched by 216 lbs Ali, dropped hard by 220 lbs Lyle and out-boxed by 213 lbs Young.

Yet the forum hipsters would tell you he would destroy 260 lbs mammoths like Fury/Joyce and bully a master boxer like Usyk who is bigger than all three of the opponents mentioned above.

Yet apparently 213lb skill lacking Wilder is supposedly the 2nd best heavyweight of this highly advanced modern era