Are today's boxers bigger & better than those who fought in the 70's n 80's?

[robertzimmerman]

Youre outa ya mind.

Look at the big picture not a few cherished names., we are talking the sport here not any individuals , the sport from cradle to grave .
The youth in boxing is waaaaaaaaaaay advanced on the youth of boxing from 30-40-60-100 years ago, how on earth can it not be are you living in a cave .

What are you talking about?

In general, were the fighters of the 90's better than the fighters of the 80's?

Were the fighters of the 00's better than the fighters of the 90's?

Is it a given that the fighters of the next decade will be better than today's fighters and all who came before them?

I didn't say fighters hadn't improved. I said that they didn't CONSTANTLY improve over time. They simply don't keep getting better and better on a constant basis. Otherwise: today's best fighters would be regarded as the greatest of all time. Yet they obviously aren't. The best guys of today are no better than the best guys of the 90's. But if they were constantly getting better, that wouldn't be the case, considering those fighters fought 20-25 years ago.

[Reloaded]

What are you talking about?

In general, were the fighters of the 90's better than the fighters of the 80's?

Were the fighters of the 00's better than the fighters of the 90's?

Is it a given that the fighters of the next decade will be better than today's fighters and all who came before them?

I didn't say fighters hadn't improved. I said that they didn't CONSTANTLY improve over time. They simply don't keep getting better and better on a constant basis. Otherwise: today's best fighters would be regarded as the greatest of all time. Yet they obviously aren't. The best guys of today are no better than the best guys of the 90's. But if they were constantly getting better, that wouldn't be the case, considering those fighters fought 20-25 years ago.

You are being so short sighted its amazing to me, the young fighters of this generation are better schooled and conditioned than the young fighters of generations gone by, it must be this way and if you look at the ability of the 3 round prospects in terms of maturity balance and punching power its as plain as day to see.

You are stuck in a mental time warp that is closed and only seeing marquee names, Im looking at the sport of boxing across the board and not a single name fighter at all, Ive seen the amateur programs constantly improving generation after generation and that has a flow effect throughout the sport.

This is not just boxing its evolution nothing can sit still with so many working too improve it, this is just life as we know it.

[robertzimmerman]

Reloaded,

You are being so short sighted its amazing to me, the young fighters of this generation are better schooled and conditioned than the young fighters of generations gone by, it must be this way and if you look at the ability of the 3 round prospects in terms of maturity balance and punching power its as plain as day to see.

I'm not being short sighted at all. I've acknowledged that boxing has evolved, but it simply doesn't keep progressing in the manner that other sports do. It doesn't keep getting stronger. The fighters don't keep getting better.

How are the young fighters today better schooled?

In what way?

There's techniques that are no longer as common today.

The young fighters of today don't encounter every style on the way up.

They get fast tracked to world titles because there's so many of them.

How are they better conditioned?

You are stuck in a mental time warp that is closed and only seeing marquee names, Im looking at the sport of boxing across the board and not a single name fighter at all, Ive seen the amateur programs constantly improving generation after generation and that has a flow effect throughout the sport.

You can look across the board.

You can look at any division you want.

You can say that the amateur system has improved. But you can't say that in general, the fighters keep getting better and better over time. Twenty Five years is a very long time, especially in sports. So if you were right, the fighters today would be noticeably better than the fighters of the 90's. But they're not. Nobody would agree that they were.

This is not just boxing its evolution nothing can sit still with so many working too improve it, this is just life as we know it.

Boxing hasn't improved over the last 25 years.

Tell me what's improved?

You can say sports science and nutrition etc, but the divisions across the board aren't stronger.

The fighters aren't better.

No new techniques have been invented.

The rules haven't changed.

Boxing has evolved since it's roots, but again, it doesn't constantly keep evolving.

[Reloaded]

Reloaded,



I'm not being short sighted at all. I've acknowledged that boxing has evolved, but it simply doesn't keep progressing in the manner that other sports do. It doesn't keep getting stronger. The fighters don't keep getting better.

How are the young fighters today better schooled?

In what way?

There's techniques that are no longer as common today.

The young fighters of today don't encounter every style on the way up.

They get fast tracked to world titles because there's so many of them.

How are they better conditioned?



You can look across the board.

You can look at any division you want.

You can say that the amateur system has improved. But you can't say that in general, the fighters keep getting better and better over time. Twenty Five years is a very long time, especially in sports. So if you were right, the fighters today would be noticeably better than the fighters of the 90's. But they're not. Nobody would agree that they were.



Boxing hasn't improved over the last 25 years.

Tell me what's improved?

You can say sports science and nutrition etc, but the divisions across the board aren't stronger.

The fighters aren't better.

No new techniques have been invented.

The rules haven't changed.

Boxing has evolved since it's roots, but again, it doesn't constantly keep evolving.

Boxing hasn't improved over the last 25 years.

It has but its harder to see the improvements over 25yrs as it is to see them over 50 or 100yrs its harder still to see them over 10ys without being heavily involved with 100s of fighters.

The more refined something becomes the less the gains are attainable, look at formula 1 its down to 1000s of a second and that next one might cost 20million in research and development .

Its easy to see the changes from Jack Johnson era to Ali era , its much harder to see the gains in power,speed,technique from Ali to now, but its there if you open your eyes its there.

Where you will see it most is through the amateurs and the prelim guys coming straight out of schooling because here you can reference loads of fighters and compare them to loads of fighters from 20-30-40 yrs ago, man as an example the 3 round guy that won by KO on Cruzs card, mate he punches better than world champions of the 30s.

When you say how has it improved I think your in a bubble and Im wasting my time.
I dont mean to be disrespectful I just dont see how you cannot see.
Look how the different country's in boxing today are controlling the winning , you think they dont carry along with that winning a bunch of different learning and techniques that influence 1000s of fighters and trainers, competition leaves no stone unturned when comes to winning you better believe that.

Look at the money in the game you dont think that money will make them look for any edge possible , that all these specific area coaches over the last 20yrs like Mackie Shilstone who are all science based are just wasting there time, yet the results they are getting is fantastic, you dont think all this filters on through the entire game over time , you dont think modern communication makes a difference to techniques being taught .

Its all about winning right, forget everything else and what we have is a competition and the aim of every fighter, every trainer, every manager is to win, and youre trying tell me in that in a learned sport there is no improvement from the the beginning till now, that boxers dont have the ability to improve their performance by seeking the best of everything in the world , man that notion defies all logic.

I suggest you talk to the top trainers today and tell them that boxing does not have an improved athlete from 20-30 yrs ago .

[!! Shawn]

Been over it 100 times, my opinion is based on common sense that in a world where everything has evolved into a better product I dont see how boxing missed out on natural evolution, knowledge is ALWAYS improving it never stops .

Dont try and complicate it just look at science and evolution.

in 1927 Babe Ruth hit 60 homeruns in a single season.

It took 34 years for Roger Maris to beat that record with 61 in 1961.

That record stood for 37 years until the Mark McGuire juiced to the gills era in 1998.

Why did that record last so long? By your estimation sports progressed in leaps and bounds in the 71 years since Babe Ruths record right?

Why didn't it?

Why did it take until 2001 for Barry Bonds to break Ruths 1920 slugging percentage record? 81 years...

All that superior training though right?

[Reloaded]

in 1927 Babe Ruth hit 60 homeruns in a single season.

It took 34 years for Roger Maris to beat that record with 61 in 1961.

That record stood for 37 years until the Mark McGuire juiced to the gills era in 1998.

Why did that record last so long? By your estimation sports progressed in leaps and bounds in the 71 years since Babe Ruths record right?

Why didn't it?

Why did it take until 2001 for Barry Bonds to break Ruths 1920 slugging percentage record? 81 years...

All that superior training though right?

Babe Ruth was one , lets say the average of all baseball in 1927 and compared it to all baseball 2016, I bet that they hit it further on average today.

They say the AVERAGE speed of thoroughbreds has gone up, greyhounds have gone up , race cars, swimmers, runners jumpers every aspect of human endeavor has improved since the 1800s.

If you understand what the question is there is no names at all no Babe Ruth, Ali or Secretariat , we are talking a universal improvement over the average.

Its there and will be there until man has reached his limits in physics, for instance a man cant run twice as fast as Bolt without shattering his tendons, so how far off that point are we as a race, who knows but mankind is trying to get to that point all of the time, winning changes history and its direction just because you cant measure it to think it dont exist in boxing is the World is Flat mentality .

[!! Shawn]

Babe Ruth was one , lets say the average of all baseball in 1927 and compared it to all baseball 2016, I bet that they hit it further on average today.

They say the AVERAGE speed of thoroughbreds has gone up, greyhounds have gone up , race cars, swimmers, runners jumpers every aspect of human endeavor has improved since the 1800s.

If you understand what the question is there is no names at all no Babe Ruth, Ali or Secretariat , we are talking a universal improvement over the average.

Its there and will be there until man has reached his limits in physics, for instance a man cant run twice as fast as Bolt without shattering his tendons, so how far off that point are we as a race, who knows but mankind is trying to get to that point all of the time, winning changes history and its direction just because you cant measure it to think it dont exist in boxing is the World is Flat mentality .

Another example. Nolan Ryan threw 108.1 mph fast ball in 1974.

Bob Feller threw 107.6 in 1946

The fast that has been thrown since that time has been 106mph.

WTF DUDE! SCIENCE! HUMAN PROGRESSION!

So you are telling me that science has allowed only 1 pitch faster than 107mph to be thrown since 1946?

What gives?

[LoadedWraps]

Here's the deal. I see a couple of threads where people reference the "better" competition during SRL, Duran's time. But was it really better competition? Or is it an illusion just because boxing was MUCH more popular during that time?

In every major sport...baseball, basketball, football, hockey.... It's widely understood that athletes today (in those sports) are bigger, better, faster, possibly more athletic than athletes in past eras.

It's just natural. Training programs, nutrition, coaching, access to resources... have improved over time.

So does this apply to boxing? I think today's boxers might be better than those of past eras because of this.. But people who watched during those times might just feel 'nostalgic' or bias because their favorite fighters fought during those times.

So what is your opinion? Are boxers 'bigger, better' today?

Definitely not better, with the exception of a few once in a lifetime type talents like Tyson Fury.

Bigger, sure, that could be argued, but size only matters to a point.

Nutritional knowledge and science has improved, but the knowledge of the intricacies of boxing has largely diminished.

The fact that you compared boxing to other mainstream sports shows your ignorance on the subject, as it's fairly well accepted in boxing that it's quite the opposite, the talent pool has shrunk dramatically, and the old sage masters of the science are but all but a memory at this point.

[Reloaded]

Another example. Nolan Ryan threw 108.1 mph fast ball in 1974.

Bob Feller threw 107.6 in 1946

The fast that has been thrown since that time has been 106mph.

WTF DUDE! SCIENCE! HUMAN PROGRESSION!

So you are telling me that science has allowed only 1 pitch faster than 107mph to be thrown since 1946?

What gives?

Answer the question , if you measure the distance of all baseball in 1927 and measured the distance of all baseball in 2016 which group do you think would hit the ball the furthest .

It seems you guys are stuck inside railway tracks and cant grasp the entire boxing industry as opposed to a select few of its stars.

Understand this the top of the Pyramid is not reflective of the average of whats below it , the top once it gets to a level doesnt change much just micro adjustments its the average thats on debate here and the average is constantly getting closer the top, applies to all things in life, it dont leave boxing out lol.

[!! Shawn]

Answer the question , if you measure the distance of all baseball in 1927 and measured the distance of all baseball in 2016 which group do you think would hit the ball the furthest .

It seems you guys are stuck inside railway tracks and cant grasp the entire boxing industry as opposed to a select few of its stars.

Understand this the top of the Pyramid is not reflective of the average of whats below it , the top once it gets to a level doesnt change much just micro adjustments its the average thats on debate here and the average is constantly getting closer the top, applies to all things in life, it dont leave boxing out lol.

Your argument is training has allowed the average boxer to be stronger and faster and better. Your average boxer does not have access to those kinds of resources.

Your average contender holds a second job and trains after work.

Its not like football or any of the other big money sports where big money goes into developing lots of talents.

Boxing is a sport where the standouts rise to the top, so to argue that oh, well that only shows an example of a standout is stupid.

Because the standouts stand out for a reason.

If you look at records related to explosive strength which would equate to punching power, or explosive speed, which would relate to hand speed. The records are either very old or have only progressed my low single digit percentage points.

The only sports that have seen huge gains are endurance sports such as cycling and running

Consider sprinting as a case study.

It took 10 years for the record to go from 9.835 to 9.768 which is only a 0.6% increase in ten years.

You act like the margins have been huge enough to make a difference, but they aren't.

even a 10% difference in speed or power doesn't really show in boxing, because it is a skill based sport like Tennis.