gnasher16 30,025 Posted July 30, 2014 Report Share Posted July 30, 2014 (edited) I think we are in broad agreement about todays skillset versus the old timers,where we differ is on the fitness of the different eras. I say the old school guys could fight as intense as Calzaghe and some of the films I own bear this out. If today's fighters are so much better conditioned, how come so many of the heavier boys are carrying surplus fat?The fighters of 50 years ago would run 8-10 miles daily ,they conditioned themselves to go 15rds at a fast pace not with peds ,but through hard constant training. It's called the championship distsnce for a reason. Im not a fan of punch stats either. Below is a guy who won the lhvy title in 1961 he had very little experience in the amateurs but became the consumate pro. A promoter was asked why he did not feature the cautious ,defensive counter punching Johnson on his cards ,he replied,"Harold Johnson represents perfection ,there is no room for perfection in boxing". He looks pretty ripped to me. Below is an interesting link http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles-frontpage/15933-the-old-master-analyzing-the-subtle-sophistication-of-joe-gans I cant lie i didnt read the entire article but i did watch the clip as i love them old fight films......in terms of fitness this clip is a perfect example......look how the styles of fighting are so much different to today,theres virtually no head movement,no jabs,very flat footed.....fights of old going 40/50 rounds dont encourage high work rate I keep using Calzaghe as reference even though i am certainly no fan of his or his style.....but he is the perfect example of what im talking about.....his intensity and movement would not have been possible for 12 x 3 minute rounds in bygone days. The reason some of the big heavies are carrying weight is because eras change,trends change.....look at the Witherspoon/Page/Tubbs era of the mid ,s the trend then was stability and bodyweight,look at the 70,s Ali/Norton/Frazier era of speed and power.......likewise todays era of sheer size and distance where skills and condition are becoming less important than size and reach......trends come and go.........look down the lower weights how fighters are working the full 3 minutes of a round and finishing the 12 rounds so fresh......i remember my ol dad telling me how annoyed with himself he would feel if he went the distance and still had something left in the tank,today you rarely see fighters on empty at the final bell..................i think its unrealistic to think sport science has evolved in every sport apart from boxing.....but interesting listening to your thoughts anyway Edited July 30, 2014 by gnasher16 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
inan 841 Posted July 30, 2014 Report Share Posted July 30, 2014 I think we are in broad agreement about todays skillset versus the old timers,where we differ is on the fitness of the different eras. I say the old school guys could fight as intense as Calzaghe and some of the films I own bear this out. If today's fighters are so much better conditioned, how come so many of the heavier boys are carrying surplus fat?The fighters of 50 years ago would run 8-10 miles daily ,they conditioned themselves to go 15rds at a fast pace not with peds ,but through hard constant training. It's called the championship distsnce for a reason. Im not a fan of punch stats either. Below is a guy who won the lhvy title in 1961 he had very little experience in the amateurs but became the consumate pro. A promoter was asked why he did not feature the cautious ,defensive counter punching Johnson on his cards ,he replied,"Harold Johnson represents perfection ,there is no room for perfection in boxing". He looks pretty ripped to me. Below is an interesting link http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles-frontpage/15933-the-old-master-analyzing-the-subtle-sophistication-of-joe-gans I cant lie i didnt read the entire article but i did watch the clip as i love them old fight films......in terms of fitness this clip is a perfect example......look how the styles of fighting are so much different to today,theres virtually no head movement,no jabs,very flat footed.....fights of old going 40/50 rounds dont encourage high work rate I keep using Calzaghe as reference even though i am certainly no fan of his or his style.....but he is the perfect example of what im talking about.....his intensity and movement would not have been possible for 12 x 3 minute rounds in bygone days. The reason some of the big heavies are carrying weight is because eras change,trends change.....look at the Witherspoon/Page/Tubbs era of the mid ,s the trend then was stability and bodyweight,look at the 70,s Ali/Norton/Frazier era of speed and power.......likewise todays era of sheer size and distance where skills and condition are becoming less important than size and reach......trends come and go.........look down the lower weights how fighters are working the full 3 minutes of a round and finishing the 12 rounds so fresh......i remember my ol dad telling me how annoyed with himself he would feel if he went the distance and had anything left in the tank,today you rarely see fighters with nothing left at the final bell..................i think its unrealistic to think sport science has evolved in every sport apart from boxing.....but interesting listening to your thoughts anyway I'm not disputing sports science has changed what I'm disputing is boxing skills have improved, I say they have regressed. Nice talking to you. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
neems 2,406 Posted July 30, 2014 Report Share Posted July 30, 2014 Even so,would you not agree they more than over compensate in strength,mass and reach? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
charlie boy 85 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 walker smith jr was by far the greatest of all time , ali after he came back from his suspension his legs were gone he was a glorified punch bag I don't rate ali in my top 10 of all time Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,025 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Even so,would you not agree they more than over compensate in strength,mass and reach? Only at heavyweight in my opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
inan 841 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Even so,would you not agree they more than over compensate in strength,mass and reach? No ,I dont think I would,I would expect Joe Louis to have a field day with Wlads contenders. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
inan 841 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 walker smith jr was by far the greatest of all time , ali after he came back from his suspension his legs were gone he was a glorified punch bag I don't rate ali in my top 10 of all time Top ten what? P4p or at heavyweight? I can see a case for excluding him in p4p ranks but not in the heavyweight division,and without being rude I would not give any credence to anyone who thought otherwise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
inan 841 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Even so,would you not agree they more than over compensate in strength,mass and reach? Only at heavyweight in my opinion. Nicolai Valuev is the tallest and heaviest heavyweight champion he is also one of, if not the worst. Jack Dempsey once sparred with a boxer named Big Ben Wray he was 7'22 300lbs, Dempsey hit him on the chin and broke his jaw in two places with one punch.We know what he did to Jess Willard who outweighed him by58lbs and was 6" taller with an 85" reach .Louis regularly kod huge men ,Simon , B Baer,Carnera etc.Joe was 6'1.5"and at his best, around 200lbs. Bigger does not necessarily mean better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K£rry 1 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Ali you would never see the likes again a man you can only give total respect .hall of fame o yes boxing of the ropes he did to beat a man on paper he should not of gone in with Forman.heavyweights of today he would of worked out in a round and kilt brothers would not have lived with marciano he would be over them like a rash only my view Quote Link to post Share on other sites
oneredtrim 148 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 No matter what folks opinions are ...Clay did take-out the two tysons of his day with two different styles..it's hard to think of another heavy that's done that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K£rry 1 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 He did with a boxing brain not on mass and over powering now then Ali v Holyfield good match up what you think Quote Link to post Share on other sites
oneredtrim 148 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 He did with a boxing brain not on mass and over powering now then Ali v Holyfield good match up what you think Would clay be allowed to use to use growing agents aswell? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
charlie boy 85 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 hollyfield was a PED using cheater - FACT Quote Link to post Share on other sites
neems 2,406 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Even so,would you not agree they more than over compensate in strength,mass and reach? Only at heavyweight in my opinion. I'd say definitely at heavy,but also to varying degrees at every weight. Outside of heavy modern fighters on top of that have much better speed and conditioning. You use Calzaghe as an example but even a fighter like Hatton would have had an unheard of work rate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TUFFTY 1,476 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 hollyfield was a PED using cheater - FACT ??????? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.