Henry Armstrong- Top 5 P4P or overrated due to romanticism?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I personally think this thread is ******ed. When compilating atg p4p rankings, fighters are judged relative to their era. Anybody knows that none of the pre 70s fighters could be anything else but cup holders in this era.

Please take the time to actually watch/study these guys before dismissing them. You should watch a guy like Armstrong and imagine how good he could've been in the modern day with benefits of modern technology, training etc.

[john l]

Please take the time to actually watch/study these guys before dismissing them. You should watch a guy like Armstrong and imagine how good he could've been in the modern day with benefits of modern technology, training etc.

bingo good point

[KingHippo]

Please take the time to actually watch/study these guys before dismissing them. You should watch a guy like Armstrong and imagine how good he could've been in the modern day with benefits of modern technology, training etc.

I haven't watched much of Armstrong, but I did watch enough of SRR to know that his form, balance and mechanics were all over the place. I have absolutely no doubt that he would get destroyed in today's boxing.

Second, if you gave old time boxers current training, they wouldn't have the same skills would they? If you pumped Joe Frazier full of steroids and had him train with Freddie Roach for 2 years, pretty sure he could do something of himself. But if you had him fight the exact way he did 50 years ago, no amount of strength training or PEDs could save him.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I haven't watched much of Armstrong, but I did watch enough of SRR to know that his form, balance and mechanics were all over the place. I have absolutely no doubt that he would get destroyed in today's boxing.

Second, if you're giving him current training, he wouldn't have the same skills would he? If you pumped Joe Frazier full of steroids and had him train with Freddie Roach for 2 years, pretty sure he could do something of himself too. But if you had him fight the exact way he did 50 years ago, no amount of strength training or PEDs could save him.

I honestly hope your trolling.
SSR is the most phenomenal fighter to ever lace 'em up.

[Ray Corso]

"with benefits of modern technology, training etc."........
Maybe your the one who can explain these "modern techniques" they didn't have then.......try!

Tell me how a boxer like Mayweather could out box Robinson, try!

Tell me how a current pressure fighter like Maidana would be better than Armstrong at coming forward?
How has "modern boxing" advanced the styles and forms?

I hear this sh*! here all the time but no one ever explains WHAT modern technologies their actually talking about ARE!

Is there a new punch invented? Some kind of new movement established, a new defense employed?
SPEAK up!!!!


Ray

[Damn Wicked]

Henry Armstrong -151 W, 21 L, 9 D- considered by many to be one of the greatest fighters to ever lace up the gloves. His list of accomplishments are incredible: he held the the lineal world featherweight, lightweight and welterweight titles during his career, and amazingly held them simultaneously between 1938-39. He was also despicably robbed when challenging for the lineal middleweight title against Ceferino Garcia in 1940 when the referee scored the contest a draw. Despite these unmatched accomplishments, when watching footage of "Homicide Hank" there appears to be many holes and technical flaws in his game. Armstrong would essentially walk straight ahead look to get close to his opponent and unload his powerful, windmill like punches. His style wasn't pretty but extremely effective in his era. But when comparing him to fighters many experts rank below him would that style be effective? Would he stand any chance against a skilled technician like Willie Pep at featherweight? Could he hang with Duran at 135? I for one am doubtful. So I'd like to ask the other boxing enthusiasts out there what our their thoughts on Henry Armstrong? Where does he rank in boxing history? And where does he rank amongst his peers? And do his accomplishments outweigh his technical deficiences?

Everyone is overrated due to nostalgia/ romanticism. Over time myths grow. Rarely, if ever, do they fade. The same way musicians/ bands sometimes garner more acclaim after they're long gone.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

"with benefits of modern technology, training etc."........
Maybe your the one who can explain these "modern techniques" they didn't have then.......try!

Tell me how a boxer like Mayweather could out box Robinson, try!

Tell me how a current pressure fighter like Maidana would be better than Armstrong at coming forward?
How has "modern boxing" advanced the styles and forms?

I hear this sh*! here all the time but no one ever explains WHAT modern technologies their actually talking about ARE!

Is there a new punch invented? Some kind of new movement established, a new defense employed?
SPEAK up!!!!


Ray

When I speak of modern technologies I'm talking about elements outside the ring. Fighters are enabled to live healthier, aid recovery, improve muscle memory etc. Which would of course be beneficial in the ring. Training techniques are much more effective today in order to preserve a fighters body allowing them to have more longevity in their careers. You've got the wrong end of the stick there bro and taken what I've said out of its intended context.

[Prince Madison]

you kidding right

nah im not kidding, there was 30 times he stepped into the ring when he didnt win.

[Ray Corso]

RJJ-94-02=GOAT========You are a BS'er bro!!!!!!

I asked for a few "new techniques" that current fighters use, you gave no answer.
When Robinson boxed it WAS the Modern Era learn your history bro.

More longevity? Sugar Ray fought for 25 years bro, he was fighting top ten contenders and champions far heyond his prime and was winning and loosing great bouts.
You wouldn't know the Moyers from the Fulmers because you think you know your life span of boxing but that amounts to ten seconds in history time.

I was training fighters l-o-n-g before you were born bro.
So instead of trying to be "modern" understand that your talking about "current" modern began in the early 1930's in boxing....bro!

Ray

[john l]

nah im not kidding, there was 30 times he stepped into the ring when he didnt win.

he fought like almost 300 times or more!!!!!!!!!!! with no am exp and most of those losses were at start and end of his fightin days . man I'm sry but you need to do your history.boxing did not start in 2005