Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Were the past greats really that great!?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Yawn......

    Obviously they were great fighters. But just like todays fighters they get overrated.

    Just because Bob Cousy couldnt guard Chris Paul doesnt mean he wasnt a great basketball player.

    Comment


    • [QUOTE=JAB5239;11570764]

      I can post literally dozens and dozens of fights from the past with fighter going at a non stop pace for 15 rounds if anyone would like.



      No, I've already refuted this with facts. Try again.



      [FONT="Tahoma"]Lol, the WORST barometer! Put Bolt on a dirt track with a regular pair of running shoes from Owen's day and see if he's still nearly as fast. I can guarantee he wouldn't be.[/FONT]


      I've just put it to rest unless you can argue anything I've posted in this thread isn't a fact.

      Jab you're contradicting yourself a bit by saying a change in a track and shoes make a difference. I say that because we've had numerous conversations about how the advancement in technology does make an athlete any more effective.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View Post
        That is not true.

        Yes it is. If it isn't than supply some evidence. If fighters back in the day were allowed to weigh in 36 hours before the fight middleweights would have been dehydrating and re-hydrating themselves like today. Bring back same day weigh ins and you would see a massive end to this.

        Comment


        • [QUOTE=studentofthegam;11571280]
          Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post


          Jab you're contradicting yourself a bit by saying a change in a track and shoes make a difference. I say that because we've had numerous conversations about how the advancement in technology does make an athlete any more effective.
          More effective yes, not better. Put all athletes under the same kind of circumstances and suddenly things wouldn't look so different. I don't see where the contradiction is as I have always stated this. Can ANYONE on this forum tell me Bolt wouldn't be slower had he had to run under the same conditions as Jess Owens?

          Comment


          • [QUOTE=JAB5239;11571309]
            Originally posted by studentofthegam View Post

            More effective yes, not better. Put all athletes under the same kind of circumstances and suddenly things wouldn't look so different. I don't see where the contradiction is as I have always stated this. Can ANYONE on this forum tell me Bolt wouldn't be slower had he had to run under the same conditions as Jess Owens?
            Personally I think Bolt could run barefoot and still break Jesse's records. Tracksters werent built like that during WW1. Track is the closest thing we have to proving athletic prgression over time. Things that were thought to be impossible like the 4min mile we've found out over time that its very possible and not as hard as we thought for the supreme runners of the modern era. Boxing is much tougher to debate.

            Comment


            • Nowa days, we get mentally weak fighters, fighters who can't fight from all ranges (Mostly inside), fighters who gas out, one-handed fighters, fighters with bad punching technique; no coordination, fighters who can't cut off the ring. The sport is in a bad state in my opinion, and to top it off Mayweather and Pacquiao get way too much media attention.

              The worst part is how we have to wait 3-4 months for fights that SHOULDN'T have gotten 'so much build up, Alexander, Bradley, Khan, Peterson...neither of them accomplished anything that should have warranted that much waiting. To hear Bradley at one time say "I wanted to build up the Alexander fight" I mean, are you fucking serious?. I see I'm getting off-topic a bit, but that's how I feel about the sport right now.

              Comment


              • [QUOTE=studentofthegam;11571325]
                Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
                Personally I think Bolt could run barefoot and still break Jesse's records. Tracksters werent built like that during WW1. Track is the closest thing we have to proving athletic prgression over time. Things that were thought to be impossible like the 4min mile we've found out over time that its very possible and not as hard as we thought for the supreme runners of the modern era. Boxing is much tougher to debate.

                Bolt may very well have always been faster, Im not even trying to argue that. But put him on a dirt track with no starting block, on canvas running shoes and his time drops BIG TIME. Owens ran a 10.2 100 meters under these conditions, give him the favorable conditions of today and he runs with the very best today even if he isn't the very best himself.

                Comment


                • Bernard Hopkins is a perfect example of today's lack of talent, Pavlik couldn't decipher what went on in that ring. Atlas said it best, though some saw it as back handed compliments when Atlast seemed to have discredited Hopkins' recent wins, although he was 100% on point but this is what he said,

                  Jump to 1:30



                  Teddy Atlas brought up what was lacking in the sport and attributed Hopkins' success to that, Bernard disagreed, but from 3:28 on he was in more of an agreement. Atlas was right in saying that "You have fighters from today who would be surprised (By what Hopkins brings) but fighters from the golden era, the fighters back from a little bit more of a solid era...they wouldn't be surprised by that.

                  Comment


                  • I agree, because Ray Robinson, Ray Leonard, Roberto Duran, Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali have loss on their record.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Dominicano Soy View Post
                      Bernard Hopkins is a perfect example of today's lack of talent, Pavlik couldn't decipher what went on in that ring. Atlas said it best, though some saw it as back handed compliments when Atlast seemed to have discredited Hopkins' recent wins, although he was 100% on point but this is what he said,

                      Jump to 1:30



                      Teddy Atlas brought up what was lacking in the sport and attributed Hopkins' success to that, Bernard disagreed, but from 3:28 on he was in more of an agreement. Atlas was right in saying that "You have fighters from today who would be surprised (By what Hopkins brings) but fighters from the golden era, the fighters back from a little bit more of a solid era...they wouldn't be surprised by that.
                      Come on. You Teddy is emotional about being completely wrong. He usually is but he doesnt usually have to answer to it. It was a shot at Bernard not the era in boxing. Though it is true that Pascal is athletic and nothing else. That was just Atlas taking his chance to pout on national TV. I still like him as a necessary evil in boxing though he has trouble picking winners.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP