Fighters then and now....objective differences (not opinions)

[The Iron Man]

Every sport has a few "giants" that are Great!! None from the last 15 years! Just as difficult to find in 25 years!!!

Are you saying that no sport in the last 15 years has produced someone that is considered a great? If so I assume you don't watch sports!

[tonyjones]

Are you saying that no sport in the last 15 years has produced someone that is considered a great? If so I assume you don't watch sports!

Exactly for instance Federer-tennis,messi-soccer,bolt-sprinting,phelps-swimming,woods-golf and unlike baseball and american football which have been discussed in this thread these are all worldwide sports.........I'm new school but objectively I thinks fair to say fighters were "generally" tougher back in the day

[billeau2]

Yeah but the Gracies have mostly dominated when fighters knew one style or discipline, which is why the size advantage didn't matter then. Once fighters defended the takedowns and avoided their guard, cross trained and became more well rounded they did much better against them and BJJ fighters in general. The sport has kind of passed them by now, but they're still pioneers. Just like how some of the techniques of the very early days of boxing wouldn't work against the modern boxer. A couple of the younger generation have made adjustments, like Roger Gracie, but time will tell if the family can continue dominance in the future.

Everything you said is absolutely true. What I like about the Gracies is a little different but may shed some light in this thread. I am a martial artist who has skills and specialty related to combat trianing, i.e. no interest in the sport of Ju Jutsu. I have trained guys in the ring as an aside but its not my area. The beatiful thing about the original gracie way was their ability to neutralize a much bigger and stronger opponent during some of the fighting matches in Brazil. It is not as easy as many think to use martial skill to defeat superior strength, youth, numbers, weaponry, etc. The Gracies used to show this skill as being prominant in their art.

As time moved on and they became more concerned with sport applications and the UFC their focus changed and indeed it is now common knowledge how to deal with their positions.

Like the older Gracie generations though boxers used to be more about fighting...the guys pre 1940 also had to be excellent grapplers as well. A boxer used to be a fighter and not an athlete so much. I think in both cases specializing has destroyed aspects of the pure combat skills that once dominated the ring. With Ju Jutsu I can tell you that one acquires deadly bad habits to fight in the ring and boxers seem to have lost the ability to fight at the grapple. Thats my opinion and observation.

[billeau2]

that being said, boxing's 2 main reasons why it's hard to decipher whos better, are mental game, and skill.

too many "superior" athletes have been trumped by skill, smarts and mental toughness in boxing. In other sports athleticism is a direct head to head matchup.

Overall if you take the most athletic guy in each era you can say boxing has slowly evolved too, but not in the skill and mental toughness game either, if anything it's declined due to easier times. How many times have we seen Zab Judah get wooped by slower less skilled fighters?

for the longest time I though Leonard was probably the most athletic guy in boxing, but Jones probably edges that now, and guys like Pacquiao are pretty solid runners up - even Rigondeux was looking pretty gifted, athletically.

Also: As a species we have played "Football" type games since....oh lets say via the time of the Aztecs for the sake of argument....We have been fighting since we left the cave! Hence the inteligence that goes into combat strategy and action has been part of our brain for a long time and.....the part of the brain that processes "you are about to risk getting punched in the face, choked out" versus "here comes a tiger ready to eat your face off!" is a different set of triggers. This is why the same woman who might be raped and not raise a finger in her own defense have (documented cases) lifted tractors off of their children.

And if one does not think you move differently in the two situations then try a mental exerscize: imagine having to get in the ring with Tyson to fight for your honor and then imagine the same fight but getting in the ring because Tyson is a threat to your family....You start to process differently and your body responds dfferently.

I think that combat related to that part of our brain used to be much more what boxing was about and that it has gradually become more related to athletic excellence....thats what my comment about the chest size was about. Boxing hardly has any in fighting now, the grappling has been gone for many generations and it has as your post indiciates affected the toughness and smartness and even the physical ability (15 rounds versus 12, etc) of the typical boxer these days.

[Anthony342]

Everything you said is absolutely true. What I like about the Gracies is a little different but may shed some light in this thread. I am a martial artist who has skills and specialty related to combat trianing, i.e. no interest in the sport of Ju Jutsu. I have trained guys in the ring as an aside but its not my area. The beatiful thing about the original gracie way was their ability to neutralize a much bigger and stronger opponent during some of the fighting matches in Brazil. It is not as easy as many think to use martial skill to defeat superior strength, youth, numbers, weaponry, etc. The Gracies used to show this skill as being prominant in their art.

As time moved on and they became more concerned with sport applications and the UFC their focus changed and indeed it is now common knowledge how to deal with their positions.

Like the older Gracie generations though boxers used to be more about fighting...the guys pre 1940 also had to be excellent grapplers as well. A boxer used to be a fighter and not an athlete so much. I think in both cases specializing has destroyed aspects of the pure combat skills that once dominated the ring. With Ju Jutsu I can tell you that one acquires deadly bad habits to fight in the ring and boxers seem to have lost the ability to fight at the grapple. Thats my opinion and observation.

Not all bad. Look at Frank Mir, for instance. He's an example of a more modern form of BJJ. The younger fighters can use the same style of those who came before them, as long as they make some minor adjustments, like Mir being more aggressive in his guard and not just laying there, waiting for his opponent to make a mistake or waiting for an opportunity but working to make those opportunities happen for himself. The success of wrestlers like Dan Severn, Mark Coleman and Kazushi Sakuraba, the latter especially against BJJ fighters, including 4 Gracies, showed that wrestling and avoiding the guard could neutralize BJJ, but BJJ is still an important art as is Muay Thai, as evidenced by Anderson Silva and his 7 years of dominance.

Just like how future boxers wanted to pattern themselves after the ones they grew up watching, but needed to change their defensive stance and movement to adjust to the modern era. After James Toney and Floyd Mayweather, how many guys do you think in boxing gyms try to do that shoulder roll move? Probably a lot.

[B-Bomber]

Well, with the possible exception of the current HW division, boxers nowadays are generally better athletes.

There is though a different mentality.

Think of a guy like Tony Galento.

Most would assume that a big HW like Wladimir or Lewis would have toyed with the ugly, out of shape, small man and easily Ko'ed him.

I disagree, watch the ugly, stinky barrel fight (I suggest Nova and Baer, the latter can be found on you tube). He walked backwards and crouched, waiting for his opponent to jab and measure distance. As soon as he saw a chest muscle flex he would literally jump in head first, head butting his opponent chest, then mix it up with a fair amount of low blows, knees, fore arms, rubbit punches, illegal holding, elbows and whatever dirty tactic one can imagine.

Would two great HW's like Lewis and Wladimir eventually defeat Galento and beat him to a pulp?. Most likely.
Would it be an easy night for either?. No way, if you ask me (referees back then were obviously more lenient regarding fouls).

[billeau2]

Well, with the possible exception of the current HW division, boxers nowadays are generally better athletes.

There is though a different mentality.

Think of a guy like Tony Galento.

Most would assume that a big HW like Wladimir or Lewis would have toyed with the ugly, out of shape, small man and easily Ko'ed him.

I disagree, watch the ugly, stinky barrel fight (I suggest Nova and Baer, the latter can be found on you tube). He walked backwards and crouched, waiting for his opponent to jab and measure distance. As soon as he saw a chest muscle flex he would literally jump in head first, head butting his opponent chest, then mix it up with a fair amount of low blows, knees, fore arms, rubbit punches, illegal holding, elbows and whatever dirty tactic one can imagine.

Would two great HW's like Lewis and Wladimir eventually defeat Galento and beat him to a pulp?. Most likely.
Would it be an easy night for either?. No way, if you ask me (referees back then were obviously more lenient regarding fouls).

"the stinking barrel" was very skilled...I think he would be a handful in any era and is a good example of a guy who was trained to fight not be an athlete. is sense of distance was impeccable. I had a martial arts colleague once describe guys built like Galenta....he called them "hard fat", yeah they were fat but they were not soft!

[billeau2]

Not all bad. Look at Frank Mir, for instance. He's an example of a more modern form of BJJ. The younger fighters can use the same style of those who came before them, as long as they make some minor adjustments, like Mir being more aggressive in his guard and not just laying there, waiting for his opponent to make a mistake or waiting for an opportunity but working to make those opportunities happen for himself. The success of wrestlers like Dan Severn, Mark Coleman and Kazushi Sakuraba, the latter especially against BJJ fighters, including 4 Gracies, showed that wrestling and avoiding the guard could neutralize BJJ, but BJJ is still an important art as is Muay Thai, as evidenced by Anderson Silva and his 7 years of dominance.

Just like how future boxers wanted to pattern themselves after the ones they grew up watching, but needed to change their defensive stance and movement to adjust to the modern era. After James Toney and Floyd Mayweather, how many guys do you think in boxing gyms try to do that shoulder roll move? Probably a lot.

Yes, even the thinking that predominates in MMA....you have practically an infinite amount of techniques yet guys still set up according to a guard and mount when going to the ground... Yet when the old man fought he was able to give a good account of himself against Maieda (broken arm? draw?) giving away weight and experience...and if you watch that fight it is because of his standing grappling and understanding of what is called kun uchi by some styles (sleeve lapel grab). If you speak to many the ground positions were part of Judo...they were just not emphasized the same way in that art until Kano's guys got beat in Tokyo.

The skill to me is in using technique, technique which one has to know to look for, for example, to neutralize many takedowns one has to put weight fowards on the perso initiating the takedown (Uke)...BUT if you know your grapple well from the sleeve and jacket the person will never have a chance to come in fowards...in no uniform if you know the distance, weight and position of where your hands should push....again the person cannot enter into that takedown position.

MMA today though? a lot of strength. Even the Gracies when the younger guys fight...a lot of getting a position and holding on for dear life.

I always like to see technical excellence, it is the harbinger of greatness actually, or at least proficiency. Yeah techniques like the shoulder roll are there to be applied present circumstances provided guys trust technique more than strength and force alone.

[greynotsoold]

I think that the skill level in boxing has declined because of the advances in physical conditioning/training. because that has become such a big part of boxing, more so than learning how to box. In the old days, a trainer did everything and the focus was always on how each aspect affected the fighter's boxing ability. Now, it seems that there are so many different 'experts' pulling a guy in different directions and telling him what to do, and most of them know nothing about boxing. And it is real easy to be in great shape, but to be in not so good fighting shape.
Also, there is a lack of depth in the teaching ranks. Not to say that there aren't some good teachers, and many more very dedicated teachers, but think of this. If I suggested to you that there is a lot to learn from studying the old bare-knuckle fights and the fights from the very early gloved era, I suspect that most of you would laugh at me. You would point out the 'crude' style and the 'amateurish' swings (I would be too polite to point out how many threads question how to throw 'long range' hooks; aka 'swings.') But that would be ignoring a lot- like how to place punches to maximize impact and save your hands, or how to clinch and wrestle to wear down your opponent.
People forget that eddie futch didn't invent a damn thing- and he said as much himself. So much knowledge died with the great trainers over the years. And why did it die? Because guys turn pro and fight sparingly; growth as a fighter is a process. You used to be able to fight on a regular basis, if you wanted to do so, and thus you stayed in the gym. You constantly learned, from your trainer, sparring partners, and opponents. It is really hard to become 'great' and anything you only do sometimes. the old time guys were fighters all the time- not for two nights per year, and the 6 weeks leading up to those nights.

[billeau2]

I think that the skill level in boxing has declined because of the advances in physical conditioning/training. because that has become such a big part of boxing, more so than learning how to box. In the old days, a trainer did everything and the focus was always on how each aspect affected the fighter's boxing ability. Now, it seems that there are so many different 'experts' pulling a guy in different directions and telling him what to do, and most of them know nothing about boxing. And it is real easy to be in great shape, but to be in not so good fighting shape.
Also, there is a lack of depth in the teaching ranks. Not to say that there aren't some good teachers, and many more very dedicated teachers, but think of this. If I suggested to you that there is a lot to learn from studying the old bare-knuckle fights and the fights from the very early gloved era, I suspect that most of you would laugh at me. You would point out the 'crude' style and the 'amateurish' swings (I would be too polite to point out how many threads question how to throw 'long range' hooks; aka 'swings.') But that would be ignoring a lot- like how to place punches to maximize impact and save your hands, or how to clinch and wrestle to wear down your opponent.
People forget that eddie futch didn't invent a damn thing- and he said as much himself. So much knowledge died with the great trainers over the years. And why did it die? Because guys turn pro and fight sparingly; growth as a fighter is a process. You used to be able to fight on a regular basis, if you wanted to do so, and thus you stayed in the gym. You constantly learned, from your trainer, sparring partners, and opponents. It is really hard to become 'great' and anything you only do sometimes. the old time guys were fighters all the time- not for two nights per year, and the 6 weeks leading up to those nights.

Great post!! I agree! We all tend to view ourselves through the prism of social identity foisted on us by others and today a boxer sees oneself as an athlete of sorts...Yet back in the old days a boxer was a fighter. This is a big difference in how one identifies and it affects the way one trains, what training one does and probably a level of commitment. Fighting takes a lot of training. Heck to apply martial arts one has to really understand the technique in fact in the old clasical Japanese Arts the focus is on perfection of techique. I believe boxing started out as a martial art and had similar expectations. You were not allowed to say "well as a boxer puncher I don't fight inside or counter punch" no no you did everything impeccably and then learned your sweet spot!

trained with a guy once, an Aki Jutsu martial artist and a guy tried to do him one evening...I mean like really take him out. This guy applied a wrist/arm break that is supposed to break the arm in two places (Sankyo for those of you in the know). Well... because of certain factors the guys arm was only broken in one spot....it stopped the guy but my friend felt like a failure because in his mind he had not executed tecnique properly.

Can yu imagine David Haye saying...."you know I said I would knock Chisora out in 4 rounds and it took five....Derrick you won as my lack of perfection speaks to the work I must do to improve?"