are old school fighters better than present day fighters??

[BigStereotype]

And 1000 times you come up looking like an ignorant azz :geek9:

You shoulda seen it when he finally did some reading. Twas like a door had been thrown open and all the light finally poured in. Then his dumb ass closed it again

[Glamour Puss]

You shoulda seen it when he finally did some reading. Twas like a door had been thrown open and all the light finally poured in. Then his dumb ass closed it again

Had more to do with the writer than anything. Nobody saw the fights, all we have to go by is the mythological lore the writer attached to it. It was a good read that's it.

Siding with poet.

[Spartacus Sully]

You have an odd definition of "modern." The sport they were watching in 1867 didn't look anything like 1920 (my cutoff for "modern boxing" in a loose sense), let alone 2012.

ill give you that there was barely any one fighting under queensbury rules in 1867 and that it wasnt untill sullivan started fighting under queensbury rules that i would consider him modern.

but this clip of gans vs herman in 1907 dosnt look all that bad.



same of this one with gans vs nelson



given this, id put money on NP dempsey having a modern style, and id even imagine some bareknucle lighter guys like sayers and mace also had aspects of a modern style, but i wouldnt consider them modern as they only fought under lrr.

[BigStereotype]

ill give you that there was barely any one fighting under queensbury rules in 1867 and that it wasnt untill sullivan started fighting under queensbury rules that i would consider him modern.

but this clip of gans vs herman in 1907 dosnt look all that bad.



same of this one with gans vs nelson



given this, id put money on NP dempsey having a modern style, and id even imagine some bareknucle lighter guys like sayers and mace also had aspects of a modern style, but i wouldnt consider them modern as they only fought under lrr.

Not that guys like Gans couldn't compete, that's not what I mean at all. There are certainly guys from before 1920 that could whip some ass if they fought today. But the sport is totally different. They fought with mini-gloves and could punch each other on the ground (essentially) and fouled way more often. Honestly, look at Nelson going like 45 rounds on the regular. That's not modern boxing.

[Spartacus Sully]

Not that guys like Gans couldn't compete, that's not what I mean at all. There are certainly guys from before 1920 that could whip some ass if they fought today. But the sport is totally different. They fought with mini-gloves and could punch each other on the ground (essentially) and fouled way more often. Honestly, look at Nelson going like 45 rounds on the regular. That's not modern boxing.

modern style, very similar aspects to todays boxing.

jabs, hooks, foot work, clinching, fouls, counters, fainting, ect.

[BigStereotype]

modern style, very similar aspects to todays boxing.

jabs, hooks, foot work, clinching, fouls, counters, fainting, ect.

Okay, what's your point? That there are isolated guys from before then that have a progressive style? Already admitted that. I just don't think it's reasonable to say that the "modern era" started in 1867 or even 1907. You could still punch dudes in the back of the head while they were down until 1919. Since then, it's been minor tweaks, but the rules have remained mostly the same.

[Spartacus Sully]

so in your opinion, the only diffrence between non modern boxing and modern boxing is the opposite corner rule?

thats fine, its your opinion.

in my opinion modern boxing started when the modernday rule set was first created, its my opinion.

though its also my opinion that a completly new rule set for a modern generation of boxing is a much better starting point then minor tweak.

its also my opinion, that the fighters skillset is a much more important aspect to determining modern or not, then the ruleset they fought under.

[BigStereotype]

so in your opinion, the only diffrence between non modern boxing and modern boxing is the opposite corner rule?

thats fine, its your opinion.

in my opinion modern boxing started when the modernday rule set was first created, its my opinion.

though its also my opinion that a completly new rule set for a modern generation of boxing is a much better starting point then minor tweak.

its also my opinion, that the the fighters skillset is a much more important aspect to determining modern or not, then the ruleset they fought under.

That's really not what I said.

[Spartacus Sully]

That's really not what I said.

well, thats what i got from reading it, hopefully any one else that decideds to read it gains the correct understanding.

1919 dempsey destroys a man while hes getting up, 1920 the opposite corner rule is created and you deem this as the start of modern boxing.

its clear how i came to this conclusion from what you stated.


and even in LRR there is the stipulation that any man with 1 knee and 1 hand or 2 knees on the ground is considered down, same as if any man is hanging from the ropes with his toes off the ground he is considered down.

you are never allowed to hit a man when he is down and a man that is down is not allowed to hit a non downed opponet till he gets up.

aswell in the queensbury rule set it even stated for the non downed man to go to his corner, its just that this wasnt highly praticed, similar to how clinching is illegal, but it was one of the most used tatics for heavies.

though i couldnt find anything about when rabit punching was made illegal.

[BigStereotype]

well, thats what i got from reading it, hopefully any one else that decideds to read it gains the correct understanding.

1919 dempsey destroys a man while hes getting up, 1920 the opposite corner rule is created and you deem this as the start of modern boxing.

its clear how i came to this conclusion from what you stated.


and even in LRR there is the stipulation that any man with 1 knee and 1 hand or 2 knees on the ground is considered down, same as if any man is hanging from the ropes with his toes off the ground he is considered down.

you are never allowed to hit a man when he is down and a man that is down is not allowed to hit a non downed opponet till he gets up.

aswell in the queensbury rule set it even stated for the non downed man to go to his corner, its just that this wasnt highly praticed, similar to how clinching is illegal, but it was one of the most used tatics for heavies.

though i couldnt find anything about when rabit punching was made illegal.

What I meant is that that is the last in a series of major rules changes that ushered in the era of "modern boxing." Not that any one isolated event signified the beginning.