registered boxers. bigger numbers, better fighters?

[sallywinder]

at present there may be less than 150 registered boxers in australia. if that number were 5000, would our national champions be of better quality..?

[kel]

at present there may be less than 150 registered boxers in australia. if that number were 5000, would our national champions be of better quality..?

That's a no brainer :think

[sallywinder]

proves darcy would have smashed all our present fighters then. there were 5000 or more fighters registered in 1910...

.

[Francis75]

at present there may be less than 150 registered boxers in australia. if that number were 5000, would our national champions be of better quality..?

If Australia was in dreary cold/freezing Russia would we still be so dominant at swimming ? Of course we wouldn't. The more people competing then the higher chance that better people will come through at the particular sport.

[WhataRock]

I think regardless Darcy would probably clean out jnrmiddle-supermiddle, even if the talent pool was that big today...He was just a great natural fighter.

Russia still goes alright in swimming actually Francis, they have been right at the top or winning the European championships over the last few years...Alexander Popov, Pruilkov, Kuznetsov, Prozumenshchikova come to mind.

[flamengo]

Take a look at the books.... In the past, having guys with career fights totalling 50+ bouts, yet winning a state title at best, suggests better schooling, better matches, higher competition, and the chance for guys to fight for pay as a career. Guys would often fight 2 times in a particular week, 20-30 times in a year... just making money.

The greater numbers of fighters would allow for a greater number of promotions. The greater number of promotions doesn't affect the number of champions, just ensures CHAMPS have to genuine champs, in order to retain their belts against contenders with true ring craft.

[sallywinder]

Take a look at the books.... In the past, having guys with career fights totalling 50+ bouts, yet winning a state title at best, suggests better schooling, better matches, higher competition, and the chance for guys to fight for pay as a career. Guys would often fight 2 times in a particular week, 20-30 times in a year... just making money.

The greater numbers of fighters would allow for a greater number of promotions. The greater number of promotions doesn't affect the number of champions, just ensures CHAMPS have to genuine champs, in order to retain their belts against contenders with true ring craft.

very good points.:good

[old man]

After my first 6 fights I was only beaten once by Lawrence Austin on points yet I found my self rated a class 4 fighter and number 168 in Australia at lightweight.

[flamengo]

After my first 6 fights I was only beaten once by Lawrence Austin on points yet I found my self rated a class 4 fighter and number 168 in Australia at lightweight.

The 25 pro bouts it took for the right to fight for the Vic title speaks volumes for the fighters of your time also.

25 bouts is a career today.

:good

[WhataRock]

After my first 6 fights I was only beaten once by Lawrence Austin on points yet I found my self rated a class 4 fighter and number 168 in Australia at lightweight.


Wow...there wouldnt be anymore then 35-40 dedicated lightweights in oz today I reckon.

Really puts things into perspective.

[old man]

In the early 70s they had boxing on TV 3 times a week.
TV Ringside on 7
Channel O fight niight on channel O.
Fight of the week on TCN 9 in Sydney we would get a delayed telecast on GTV9
I was lucky enough to fight on 3 of them but
I never achieved what one fighter did and he was the only boxer to achieve it.
He fought on all 4 stations.[thats all there were in the 70s]
A bit on trivia here.

Who was the only fighter who fought on all 4 TV stations?

[flamengo]

In the early 70s they had boxing on TV 3 times a week.
TV Ringside on 7
Channel O fight niight on channel O.
Fight of the week on TCN 9 in Sydney we would get a delayed telecast on GTV9
I was lucky enough to fight on 3 of them but
I never achieved what one fighter did and he was the only boxer to achieve it.
He fought on all 4 stations.[thats all there were in the 70s]
A bit on trivia here.

Who was the only fighter who fought on all 4 TV stations?

A pot shot.... Mundine snr.

[old man]

You are wrong there WAR.
I do the victorian ratings and there is only one lightweight rated in Victoria and his name is Bhaskar Sinha... and that should tell you how wrong........

[COULDHAVEBEEN]

The quality/ability level of boxing title-holders across the board has diminished for a few reasons IMO:

1/ Less fighters competing (particularly, but not only in Oz).
2/ Relatively easy modern life-styles mean there's less people with no other alternative in life than to pull on the gloves in the hope of fortune & fame, and leave poverty behind.
3/ People (on average at least) are 'softer' than in earlier times when you commonly had to roll up your sleeves and bust your butt for long days in the sun in order to earn a living. Compare that to sitting at a computer screen all day - not exactly the best cross-training available for boxers.
4/ There are such an abundance of alphabet titles available these days if you don't hold one or two you ought to be ashamed. As highlighted by Old Man earlier, in days gone by you actually earned rankings & titles. These days there's a belt or two for everyone who pulls on a glove!

There will always be needles in the haystack that bob up regardless of all of the above. But just not in as plentiful numbers as in days gone by.

[old man]

Sorry Flamengo but No.......and it will be No to your first 4 answers.

[COULDHAVEBEEN]

In the early 70s they had boxing on TV 3 times a week.
TV Ringside on 7
Channel O fight niight on channel O.
Fight of the week on TCN 9 in Sydney we would get a delayed telecast on GTV9
I was lucky enough to fight on 3 of them but
I never achieved what one fighter did and he was the only boxer to achieve it.
He fought on all 4 stations.[thats all there were in the 70s]
A bit on trivia here.

Who was the only fighter who fought on all 4 TV stations?

Was gonna go with Mundine Snr myself. Must be from that era. Paul Ferreri was on at least 2 or 3 channels - is he the 4 man?

[old man]

Couldabeen you smart*ss
I,m taking my bat and ball and going home.:hi:

[flamengo]

You are wrong there WAR.
I do the victorian ratings and there is only one lightweight rated in Victoria and his name is Bhaskar Sinha... and that should tell you how wrong........

Only one rated in the national top 10??? or only 1 L/W fighting out of Victoria?

[old man]

From the 7th of May to the 27th of July [approx 10 weeks]I had 9 fights mainly 10 rounders just to stay in the f*cken ratings:|
I once had two main events in 2 days ,a 6 and 10.
And with every fight my relatonship with the ratings was like an unreturned love or a fragile baby pleading [Please don,t drop me]with me the monthly ratings were more important than my girlfriends menstrel cycle or my Malvern Sar racer:think

[flamengo]

From the 7th of May to the 27th of July [approx 10 weeks]I had 9 fights mainly 10 rounders just to stay in the f*cken ratings:|
I once had two main events in 2 days ,a 6 and 10.
And with every fight it was like a fragile baby[Please don,t drop me]with me the monthly ratings they were more important to me than my girlfriends cycle or my Malvern Star racer:think.

I guess a 'cycle' is a good reason for the 'racer'....

[WhataRock]

You are wrong there WAR.
I do the victorian ratings and there is only one lightweight rated in Victoria and his name is Bhaskar Sinha... and that should tell you how wrong........


Really :huh ...The ANBF has three Victorian fighters in their rankings at lightweight.

Sedat Tasci
Johnny Sheferaw
Eric Anaba

I have seen Matty Ropis' march rankings somewhere for victoria..and I do actually recall only one name being listed under lightweight. It was something exotic to, so it must have been Bhaskar.

Regardless it does seem that the boxing talent is elsewhere in the division..even it is only very sparse. 11 ranked boxers in the ANBF ratings, 12 if you include Steve wills the champ.
Boxrec has 24 active lightweights listed.

Only even a quick glance reveals quite a few werent born in Australia.

Talent is thin these days.

[WhataRock]

Wait a minute....

Are you Matt Ropis old man?

[old man]

Whattarock I tell you I am doing the Victorian ratings and you reply with..........
Whattarock said....

Really :huh ...The ANBF has three Victorian fighters in their rankings at lightweight.

Sedat Tasci
Johnny Sheferaw
Eric Anaba
For a start Sedat Tasci and Johnny Sheferaw are from NSW and tell me how many fights since Eric Anaba has made Lightweight ....... Listen..
1 RATED LIGHTWEIGHT IN VICTORIA BHASKAR SINHA:nut

[WhataRock]

Alright fine you are..but from where Im sitting you are someone named "old man" on a boxing forum. And as I said I had read some other rankings for Victoria that had Bhaskar as the only ranked fighter there.

I was only going off the ANBF website..which conflicts with what you said. Thats why I posted that to ask for clarification.
Perhaps you should stick it up them for such a glaring oversight.

[old man]

Many a reason....1 both boys might have temporary relocated to Melbourne
2 Anabas' closeness to lightweight might have convinced John that he will fight at that weight or his manager might have requested he be rated Lightweight

[boxoncottonon]

In the early 70s they had boxing on TV 3 times a week.
TV Ringside on 7
Channel O fight niight on channel O.
Fight of the week on TCN 9 in Sydney we would get a delayed telecast on GTV9
I was lucky enough to fight on 3 of them but
I never achieved what one fighter did and he was the only boxer to achieve it.
He fought on all 4 stations.[thats all there were in the 70s]
A bit on trivia here.

Who was the only fighter who fought on all 4 TV stations?


Was it Lionel Rose??

[old man]

No Couldabeen got it Boxoncottonon..
Paul Ferrari....

[sallywinder]

bigger talent pool = better fighters. we have less than 100 reg pros......in the early 1900s we had thousands. australia was a world recognised boxing country, not the backwater it is now.

[balmain]

In my opinion fighters in the 70`s were possibly the last of the real warriors in aussie boxing. We fought everyone. Nobody picked and
choosed there fights. I started as a 15 year old schoolboy and finished
as a grandfather. fighters were fighters. Every gym was full of fighters, trainers and characters. I remember fighting guys like Matty Ropis, Barry
Michael and Baby Cass then becoming mates straight after. Arrh....the
memories.

[20a87]

awful thread

[sallywinder]

awful thread

awful for you because your host is a gutless, never was, big mouth cunt,....just like you...

australia has had real fighters....mundine IS NOT ONE OF THEM!!!!

[20a87]

awful for you because your host is a gutless, never was, big mouth cunt,....just like you...

australia has had real fighters....mundine IS NOT ONE OF THEM!!!!

yeah, spot on :roll: :patsch

[sallywinder]

mundine is nothing , less than nothing, hes a victim if he fought our aboriginal best........even in the history of 'new' australian boxers....but wait...youve already admitted you know nothing about australian boxing history....

[20a87]

mundine is nothing , less than nothing, hes a victim if he fought our aboriginal best........even in the history of 'new' australian boxers....but wait...youve already admitted you know nothing about australian boxing history....

lol I still reckon I know more than you, deep down you know Anthony 'the man' mundine transcends the sport in your country. If it is deserved or not is a different question.

[sallywinder]

lol I still reckon I know more than you, deep down you know Anthony 'the man' mundine transcends the sport in your country. If it is deserved or not is a different question.


trancends the sport...??? :rofl

fuck it.......:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

[20a87]

trancends the sport...??? :rofl

fuck it.......:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

In your country, yes. He could fight whoever and its headline news. Rightly or wrongly 'the man' is Australian boxing.

But good try... lol :patsch

[sallywinder]

In your country, yes. He could fight whoever and its headline news. Rightly or wrongly 'the man' is Australian boxing.

But good try... lol :patsch

he is a sad reflection on aussie boxing. thanks for bringing it up....:deal

[20a87]

he is a sad reflection on aussie boxing. thanks for bringing it up....:deal

Because he wasn't born 300 years ago??

You have lost this argument in 2 threads already I cannot believe you started one just to highlight your naivety :lol:

[LeonMcS]

In your country, yes. He could fight whoever and its headline news. Rightly or wrongly 'the man' is Australian boxing.

But good try... lol :patsch

He hasn't been headline news for a long time.

[20a87]

Just did a google search for boxing australia, can't imagine who the first named fighter was...

[20a87]

so i did one...because i know you are a lying gutless cunt.......i googled.."australian boxer"...and without clicking a link, the first fighter mentioned was.......................................................................................JEFF FENECH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

Lol you googled something different :lol:

I googled boxers from the 16th century and google came up with 'irrelevant search' only wankers like boxing from that era :deal

[20a87]

jeff fenech!!!:yep


Are you listing people obsessed with mundine now? :good

who quotes themselves??????

Still your thread big boy :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[20a87]

ron richards....great fighter in a golden age of oz boxing. would have murdered munDOG.

Sure :lol:

Just looked at his record he only fought about 3 different people 15 times each :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You are such a clown :patsch

[Rise Above]

Sure :lol:

Just looked at his record he only fought about 3 different people 15 times each :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You are such a clown :patsch

Dont worry about the fact that he fought Archie Moore twice. :-(

[crash]

Why do you have to come on here,20ah7,and try n wreck a good thread?were not talking about mundine,old man go on ,intresting reading your replys,and sallywinder keep sticking it the retarded fuck.

[LeonMcS]

I would have been talking about the actual newspapers you buy.

[20a87]

you have no respect for boxers or boxing. you are a piece of shit.

Greatest respect for anyone that steps through the ropes to fight, the sacrifices made in the pursuit of winning are truly noble imo.
I love the sport.

This guy lost to archie moore both times so its not worth bragging about is it? :huh

Athletes of today are greater than athletes of yesterday, if you can't admit this is true of boxing then you have no respect for the trainers and fighters of the sport.

You are a one man circus :lol:.

[20a87]

so who did mundog beat to win a title?

echols, soliman and geale as you well know :roll:

[Rise Above]

This guy lost to archie moore both times so its not worth bragging about is it? :huh




The fact that he was willing to fight him is enough to warrant respect. Mundine has no balls and would never fight a guy half as dangerous as those Richards fought and hence the reason he deserves little respect.

[20a87]

The fact that he was willing to fight him is enough to warrant respect. Mundine has no balls and would never fight a guy half as dangerous as those Richards fought and hence the reason he deserves little respect.

No its not hes a fighter thats what he is paid to do.

Mundine fought ottke when he was green...... Next piece of bullshit pls :happy

[Rise Above]

No its not hes a fighter thats what he is paid to do.

Mundine fought ottke when he was green...... Next piece of bullshit pls :happy

You truly are a fuckwit. So Ottke is as good as Moore was ? :lol: Also you do realise that fight was nine years ago dont you. What has Mundine done since then ?

[20a87]

You truly are a fuckwit. So Ottke is as good as Moore was ? :lol: Also you do realise that fight was nine years ago dont you. What has Mundine done since then ?

the moore fight was 70 years ago :patsch

he was better than commonwealth champion :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Rise Above]

the moore fight was 70 years ago :patsch

he was better than commonwealth champion :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

So fucking what if it was 70 years ago. Should we just forget about anything that has previously happened in the sport ?

Also you never answered my question is Ottke better than Moore ? :patsch

[20a87]

So fucking what if it was 70 years ago. Should we just forget about anything that has previously happened in the sport ?

Also you never answered my question is Ottke better than Moore ? :patsch

you made a point about something being nine years ago :patsch .No, we should remember the notable episodes but not obscure boxing references for the purposes of being a petty know it all.

Moore didnt seem to bring it against the biggest names, anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras as it can't be resolved.

[Rise Above]

you made a point about something being nine years ago :patsch .No, we should remember the notable episodes but not obscure boxing references for the purposes of being a petty know it all.

Moore didnt seem to bring it against the biggest names, anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras as it can't be resolved.

So Ottke beating Mundine is a notable episode in boxings history but Archie Moore is an obscure boxing reference. :lol::lol:

[20a87]

So Ottke beating Mundine is a notable episode in boxings history but Archie Moore is an obscure boxing reference. :lol::lol:

Never said it was. :patsch

Trying to validate another fighter by saying he fought someone better is a really weak angle of argument and putting words in my mouth shows you have lost any belief in your own argument. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Rise Above]

You certainly implied that it was a notable episode and then you used the age old excuse in regards to answering whether or not Ottke was better than Moore.

"Moore didnt seem to bring it against the biggest names, anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras as it can't be resolved."

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

[20a87]

You certainly implied that it was a notable episode and then you used the age old excuse in regards to answering whether or not Ottke was better than Moore.

"Moore didnt seem to bring it against the biggest names, anyway you can't compare fighters from different eras as it can't be resolved."

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl


Thanks for showing you were wrong.

All about context, though. :good

Your posting = :patsch

[flamengo]

Thanks for showing you were wrong.

All about context, though. :good

Your posting = :patsch

Cock head, sounds like you took a peek at the record of Ron Richards... being unable to state anything other than he fought Archie Moore (Rise Above had to point that out anyway) shows what a truly dopey leaked pile of filth you are.

Take a closer look at his record. Name a few things about it of consequence that give this bloke a LEGENDARY name.. Educate yourself. Try.

[20a87]

Cock head, sounds like you took a peek at the record of Ron Richards... being unable to state anything other than he fought Archie Moore (Rise Above had to point that out anyway) shows what a truly dopey leaked pile of filth you are.

Take a closer look at his record. Name a few things about it of consequence that give this bloke a LEGENDARY name.. Educate yourself. Try.

Obviously i had a look at boxrec that's what it is for. It means people can bypass you "educated fans" :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[flamengo]

Come on... I'd like to hear about Ron Richards. Inform me on why he is still admired as a great fighter. Anthony Mundine looks up to him.. Did you know that?? Stop ducking the request. Tell us about Richards...

[20a87]

Come on... I'd like to hear about Ron Richards. Inform me on why he is still admired as a great fighter. Anthony Mundine looks up to him.. Did you know that?? Stop ducking the request. Tell us about Richards...

You know all you want to already. Is the answer he liked to drink or never won a world title??? I don't know what you are looking for from me.

Modern fighters > Old fighters

:good

[flamengo]

You know all you want to already. Is the answer he liked to drink or never won a world title??? I don't know what you are looking for from me.

Modern fighters > Old fighters

:good

If thats the best you can do... It's back to the drawing board for you.

Anthony Mundine has become a national joke amongst- trainers, fighters, promoters, veterans, amatuers, fight fans in general, newspapers and press/TV.

Take it as gospel.... compared to Ron Richards, Mundine has acheived NOTHING.

Now, politely fuck off out of this forum. You don't come up with valid arguments, or anything additional. :hi:

[Sox]

Now, politely fuck off out of this forum. You don't come up with valid arguments, or anything additional. :hi:
The dope will be gone any day now, school holidays are almost finished.

[20a87]

If thats the best you can do... It's back to the drawing board for you.

Anthony Mundine has become a national joke amongst- trainers, fighters, promoters, veterans, amatuers, fight fans in general, newspapers and press/TV.

Take it as gospel.... compared to Ron Richards, Mundine has acheived NOTHING.

Now, politely fuck off out of this forum. You don't come up with valid arguments, or anything additional. :hi:

World champ just like ron ... oh wait lol :lol::lol:

My 'invalid arguments' make much more sense than your inane ramblings. Stay in the past mr. sugar :roll::lol::lol::lol:

[sallywinder]

im very close to putting 20(INCH COCK UP HIS ASS)a87.........on ignore. ive never seen such a pile of shit, dumb, constant dribble, child desiring, cock head such as he.

fuck it!!! i will. IGNORED!

i suggest others think about simmilar actions.

[20a87]

im very close to putting 20(INCH COCK UP HIS ASS)a87.........on ignore. ive never seen such a pile of shit, dumb, constant dribble, child desiring, cock head such as he.

fuck it!!! i will. IGNORED!

i suggest others think about simmilar actions.

:hi:

:happy

[Super_Fly_Sam]

anyone got any idea how many registered amatuer fighters we havein aus?? perhapes even a ball park figure??

Im guessin it would be much higher then the number of registered pros

[WhataRock]

Moore didnt seem to bring it against the biggest names, .

:verysad...Thats seriously one of the stupidest things I have ever read on this forum and thats really saying something considering some of the pearlers that come out of the general forum. Like "Ricky Hatton would stop Kid Gavilan in 5"...your one is up there with them 20a87, congrats.

[20a87]

:verysad...Thats seriously one of the stupidest things I have ever read on this forum and thats really saying something considering some of the pearlers that come out of the general forum. Like "Ricky Hatton would stop Kid Gavilan in 5"...your one is up there with them 20a87, congrats.

It was a facetious remark to be fair, there is no reasoning with the extremist views of the 'classic' boxing fans. Apples and oranges.

[WhataRock]

Think about in 20a87...you only follow the modern game and how much you know about even just that is questionable. Your knowledge on boxing history has already been exposed as dreadful.

A guy like flamengo for instance knows a hell of a lot about BOTH the classic eras and modern era..he has shown that time and time again.

Who is the more qualified to make a comparison of Ron Richards and Anthony Mundine?

At least these extremist classic boxing fans have a leg to stand on...you got nothing. You're bringing a spoon to a gunfight kid, maybe you should listen a bit and learn something for a change.

[ashley]

:verysad...Thats seriously one of the stupidest things I have ever read on this forum......

I guess you missed my Mundine at 154 thread :yep

[WhataRock]

I guess you missed my Mundine at 154 thread :yep

Dont worry ash...you make the top 10 :lol:

But St George supporters get a bit of a pass because obviously they were already born with some kind of mental handicap.

[ashley]

Dont worry ash...you make the top 10 :lol:

But St George supporters get a bit of a pass because obviously they were already born with some kind of mental handicap.


I pissed myself laughing at this one :rofl


Take a look at this KO as a thank you for the LOL :good

2:15 If you want to go right there

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[20a87]

Think about in 20a87...you only follow the modern game and how much you know about even just that is questionable. Your knowledge on boxing history has already been exposed as dreadful.

A guy like flamengo for instance knows a hell of a lot about BOTH the classic eras and modern era..he has shown that time and time again.

Who is the more qualified to make a comparison of Ron Richards and Anthony Mundine?

At least these extremist classic boxing fans have a leg to stand on...you got nothing. You're bringing a spoon to a gunfight kid, maybe you should listen a bit and learn something for a change.

To be fair I never professed to be a boxing historian and I really could not give a shit about 'boxing history'. What irks me though is the pomposity of people who clearly have no intention of hearing an opinion other than their own. It is so ridiculous to compare old fighters with those of today, my main gripe is that people actually think that in this sport no improvements have been made and the standard has lowered which is crazy considering every other sport accepts this. Justifying arguments using heart/toughness/will etc is weak.

I don't need or want to be taught by sanctimonious weirdos with some sort of agenda driven by nostalgia. I'm more than capable of making up my own mind thanks!

Anthony mundine had nothing to do with the initial argument and was just shoehorned into the debate because it seems no thread is complete without a bit of bashing 'the man' and random mudslinging at anyone that supports him.

[WhataRock]

Yeah already watched it...highlight reel KO if Ive ever seen one.

Pretty damn brutal for such a little scrapper.

[ashley]

Yeah already watch it...highlight reel KO if Ive ever seen one.

Pretty damn brutal for such a little scrapper.

KTFO thats for sure :dead

[20a87]

I pissed myself laughing at this one :rofl


Take a look at this KO as a thank you for the LOL :good

2:15 If you want to go right there

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

That was brutal wasn't it mate, he didn't see that coming in the slightest went down a bit like hatton

[LeonMcS]

How bizarre, just finished watching the fight then read your post Ash. Early contender for KO of the year.

[ashley]

That was brutal wasn't it mate, he didn't see that coming in the slightest went down a bit like hatton

Yeah...I thought Hatton still had just a tad of life left in him despite going down hard.....the other guy looked like he copped a head on with a truck :dead

[ashley]

Yeah already watched it...highlight reel KO if Ive ever seen one.

Pretty damn brutal for such a little scrapper.

Ok smarty pants...have you seen this KO?


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[WhataRock]

To be fair I never professed to be a boxing historian and I really could not give a shit about 'boxing history'. What irks me though is the pomposity of people who clearly have no intention of hearing an opinion other than their own. It is so ridiculous to compare old fighters with those of today, my main gripe is that people actually think that in this sport no improvements have been made and the standard has lowered which is crazy considering every other sport accepts this. Justifying arguments using heart/toughness/will etc is weak.

I don't need or want to be taught by sanctimonious weirdos with some sort of agenda driven by nostalgia. I'm more than capable of making up my own mind thanks!


Believe me mate I was firmly in your camp not 5-6 years ago..But it was my ability to actually hear out other people who have been in this game longer then I have that saw me change my tune and actually look into what they were saying.

Its just as ridiculous to say boxing has improved when you clearly havent done a lick of research on boxing history. How the fuck can you know what it "improved" from?

BOXING IS NOT OTHER SPORTS.

Boxing is not running in a straight line...Its not lifting a weight over your head. There are just to many differences and intangibles coming into play.

The standard has been lowered...Back in Ron's day there were less divisions and only one title per division. Now the talent pool is spread over many more weight divvys, with sometimes at least 4 different bloke staking their claim as a "world champion". More divisions, plus more belts dilute what it means to be a world champ.
Almost universally across the globe participation rates for boxing have fallen, further taking away from the overall pool of fighters...Boxing was televised on free to air, sometimes in prime time slots in the 60's and 70's..now you pay through the nose just for the privilege to watch an hour or two of boxing..Without a shadow of a doubt boxing is not the premier sport it once was in terms of popularity and social impact.

Even a basic analysis of film can show you that technically boxing hasnt improved very much if at all from the 50's-60's..in some areas it has regressed. Not when guys like Ricardo Mayorga, Daisuke Naito, Valuev, Valero, Froch, Margarito, David Diaz, Calzaghe, Paul Williams, Darchinyan etc etc etc have been world champs or even p4p material in this era.

The best of today are as good as the best of 50 years ago..Some of them are among the best fighters I have ever seen. But its the next tiers that arent even near their similarly ranked peers of the past.

Boxing hasnt really improved overall...because for everything that has been improved upon, another area has regressed.

[20a87]

Believe me mate I was firmly in your camp not 5-6 years ago..But it was my ability to actually hear out other people who have been in this game longer then I have that saw me change my tune and actually look into what they were saying.

Its just as ridiculous to say boxing has improved when you clearly havent done a lick of research on boxing history. How the fuck can you know what it "improved" from?

BOXING IS NOT OTHER SPORTS.

Boxing is not running in a straight line...Its not lifting a weight over your head. There are just to many differences and intangibles coming into play.

The standard has been lowered...Back in Ron's day there were less divisions and only one title per division. Now the talent pool is spread over many more weight divvys, with sometimes at least 4 different bloke staking their claim as a "world champion". More divisions, plus more belts dilute what it means to be a world champ.
Almost universally across the globe participation rates for boxing have fallen, further taking away from the overall pool of fighters...Boxing was televised on free to air, sometimes in prime time slots in the 60's and 70's..now you pay through the nose just for the privilege to watch an hour or two of boxing..Without a shadow of a doubt boxing is not the premier sport it once was in terms of popularity and social impact.

Even a basic analysis of film can show you that technically boxing hasnt improved very much if at all from the 50's-60's..in some areas it has regressed. Not when guys like Ricardo Mayorga, Daisuke Naito, Valuev, Valero, Froch, Margarito, David Diaz, Calzaghe, Paul Williams, Darchinyan etc etc etc have been world champs or even p4p material in this era.

The best of today are as good as the best of 50 years ago..Some of them are among the best fighters I have ever seen. But its the next tiers that arent even near their similarly ranked peers of the past.

Boxing hasnt really improved overall...because for everything that has been improved upon, another area has regressed.

Fair play to you, this is a good argument.

I've obviously watched the odd couple of black and white/early colour fights I'd watch anyone fight anywhere. I think participation rates have changed because it is a lot harder to make money from being a fighter today and at the top end of the spectrum the competition is fierce when looking to turn pro. I think it would be hard to find a promoter to bankroll you unless you were a top amateur and this creates a gap between the journeymen and the top guys.

If like you say the technical aspect of boxing hasn't changed then surely the difference in training methods would favour the modern fighters in speed and power development etc

I think the argument overall is moot as we can't get these mythical matchups made but for my money the best of the best today should be beating the best from yesteryear. ;)

[WhataRock]

Fair play to you, this is a good argument.

I've obviously watched the odd couple of black and white/early colour fights I'd watch anyone fight anywhere. I think participation rates have changed because it is a lot harder to make money from being a fighter today and at the top end of the spectrum the competition is fierce when looking to turn pro. I think it would be hard to find a promoter to bankroll you unless you were a top amateur and this creates a gap between the journeymen and the top guys.

If like you say the technical aspect of boxing hasn't changed then surely the difference in training methods would favour the modern fighters in speed and power development etc

I think the argument overall is moot as we can't get these mythical matchups made but for my money the best of the best today should be beating the best from yesteryear. ;)

They perhaps have...because the fastest fighters you will see have come from the last 30 years.

But thats the thing, its not nessarily an improvement...its just a change. Fighter from yesteryear trained more specifically for stamina because they fought longer and more often.

A guy like Joe Brown can fight in 3 x 15 rounders in a 4 month period but a bloke like Miguel Cotto can barely make 12 rounds with 3 months to train for it.
And speed has been shown to be trumped on many occasions in this era (and all others) by timing, ringcraft and overall skill..something that was more appreciated in Ron's day for instance.

And for the record even fighters and trainers of today dont think todays crop is any better...For instance Freddie Roach feels Manny couldnt of beaten Duran etc.

[PIPO23]

Ah....maybe.You increase the probability in finding an atg however it is never a gauranteed.It is at times like winning a lottery.However, some (countries) are just naturally good.Liike Mexico with their heart of aztecs who you punch harder and they ask for more.And Cubans g'daym quick and slick.I see Ozboxing is commiting to bringing qty imports to strengthen the state of boxing in this country.There are quite a few good once going around and some locals are good however the trick it to get some Mexicans,PR and Cubans aside from the africans and arabs there problem solved.

:bbb

[flamengo]

W.a.R.. Belting your head against a Brick Wall and politely asking it to stop hurting your forehead won't make any change.. lol.. I guess a simplistic way for 20a86 to get an idea of the games differences between different eras- may be to look at something like the H/W ratings of Top 8 of 1974.. As rated by 'Ring Magazine';

CHAMPION: Muhammad Ali
1. George Foreman..
2. Joe Frazier
3. Ron Lyle
4. Joe Bugner
5. Oscar Bonevena
6. Ken Norton
7. Jerry Quarry
8. Chuck Wepner

The connections of EVERY fighter in the list to one another, all memorable names, within thier own careers is nothing short of incredible. Without wasting time to check things out, there has to be atleast 40+ fights combining the same names together..

Looking at the current list of P4P H/W's... I won't even bother..

Take into account, these match up's reflected in the ratings systems of all countries, in their own ratings in each weight, pretty much since Nat Fliescher incorporated a RATING system to the Ring Magazine in '22. Bullshit choas that was priority before then, the same as current P4P dribble.

[ashley]

W.a.R.. Belting your head against a Brick Wall and politely asking it to stop hurting your forehead won't make any change.. lol.. I guess a simplistic way for 20a86 to get an idea of the games differences between different eras- may be to look at something like the H/W ratings of Top 8 of 1974.. As rated by 'Ring Magazine';

CHAMPION: Muhammad Ali
1. George Foreman..
2. Joe Frazier
3. Ron Lyle
4. Joe Bugner
5. Oscar Bonevena
6. Ken Norton
7. Jerry Quarry
8. Chuck Wepner

The connections of EVERY fighter in the list to one another, all memorable names, within thier own careers is nothing short of incredible. Without wasting time to check things out, there has to be atleast 40+ fights combining the same names together..

Looking at the current list of P4P H/W's... I won't even bother..

Take into account, these match up's reflected in the ratings systems of all countries, in their own ratings in each weight, pretty much since Nat Fliescher incorporated a RATING system to the Ring Magazine in '22. Bullshit choas that was priority before then, the same as current P4P dribble.

Black and white nut hugger :lol:

Dont you know anybody that has fought in the era of colour TV :D


Are you in your 80's?

[flamengo]

Black and white nut hugger :lol:

Dont you know anybody that has fought in the era of colour TV :D


Are you in your 80's?

Black and White nuthugger??? You racist cunt.

ESB Members, here's a question..

Why did the queue jumping, tax dodging, pigeon toed, track suit wearing, asian tourist paedophile, with 9 drink driving convictions cross the road??

Because Ashley was on the other side!!!

[LeonMcS]

Whats wrong with tracksuits?

[flamengo]

Whats wrong with tracksuits?

STFU wingnut!!

[JOSEY WALES]

W.a.R.. Belting your head against a Brick Wall and politely asking it to stop hurting your forehead won't make any change.. lol.. I guess a simplistic way for 20a86 to get an idea of the games differences between different eras- may be to look at something like the H/W ratings of Top 8 of 1974.. As rated by 'Ring Magazine';

CHAMPION: Muhammad Ali
1. George Foreman..
2. Joe Frazier
3. Ron Lyle
4. Joe Bugner
5. Oscar Bonevena
6. Ken Norton
7. Jerry Quarry
8. Chuck Wepner

The connections of EVERY fighter in the list to one another, all memorable names, within thier own careers is nothing short of incredible. Without wasting time to check things out, there has to be atleast 40+ fights combining the same names together..

Looking at the current list of P4P H/W's... I won't even bother..

Take into account, these match up's reflected in the ratings systems of all countries, in their own ratings in each weight, pretty much since Nat Fliescher incorporated a RATING system to the Ring Magazine in '22. Bullshit choas that was priority before then, the same as current P4P dribble.

You can't educate pork mate but you CAN attempt to cure it . decent try there Flamer.:good

[flamengo]

You can't educate pork mate but you CAN attempt to cure it . decent try there Flamer.:good


Pay ya taxes Whale Hunter!

[ashley]

Black and White nuthugger??? You racist cunt.

ESB Members, here's a question..

Why did the queue jumping, tax dodging, pigeon toed, track suit wearing, asian tourist paedophile, with 9 drink driving convictions cross the road??

Because Ashley was on the other side!!!


When I said black and white I was talking about your TV in your lounge room :lol:

I dont get ther rest :-(

[20a87]

When I said black and white I was talking about your TV in your lounge room :lol:

I dont get ther rest :-(

I don't reckon there is anything to "get" and even if there was it is probably lame.