List all of the reasons modern fighters would beat older fighters

[cross_trainer]

Both for heavyweights and for the other weights.

Go.

[McGrain]

-

[cross_trainer]

-

Good list. A little long-winded, perhaps...

[McGrain]

Good list. A little long-winded, perhaps...

It's why I have such a high post count.

[The Whaler]

They're bigger on average, though that comes with advantages and disadvantages.

Better nutrition and an understanding of proper diet, I guess.

More participants in the sport, though I can't quote any figures. There may actually be less.

Supplements and roids.

State-of-the-art training methods.

[cross_trainer]

They're bigger on average, though that comes with advantages and disadvantages.

Better nutrition and an understanding of proper diet, I guess.

More participants in the sport, though I can't quote any figures. There may actually be less.

Supplements and roids.

State-of-the-art training methods.

Nice avatar. Mine is a self-portrait too.

[Ambition_Def]

Holyfield's headbutt will break the stalemate.

[cross_trainer]

I'll add a few more...

1) Greater professionalism in the sport = better fighters

2) Superior technique

3) All sports evolve, so this one must too

4) More rest in between fights

5) Safer amateur fights

6) The fact that they don't get involved in wars gives them more experience

7) Fewer professional fights = less damage sustained

[McGrain]

They're bigger on average, though that comes with advantages and disadvantages.

This only applies to heavyweights of course.

Better nutrition and an understanding of proper diet, I guess.

No. Fighters then knew exactly what they should and shouldn't be eating. In Jack Johnsons book he explains the benifits of getting protein without eating to much read meat and eating fruit and veg etc. Of course not everyone lived to these tenants (Greb etc.) but there are those who haven't in every era (Monzon etc.).

More participants in the sport, though I can't quote any figures. There may actually be less.

Well in pitsburgh in the 1940's there were 5-7 boxing shows every week and the best athletes were as likely to get involved in boxing as American football.

Of course, there weren't as many Croatians boxing.

I want to see statistcal proof taking into account the great dominance of other sports over boxing now before I will acknowledge the more fighters now.

Supplements and roids.

I think that boxing is a lot less roided up than people seem to believe. Certainly MMA is worse of for example.

State-of-the-art training methods.

Fighters spar less now because it's safer. They work pades instead because it's safer. Whether it makes them better fighters in peak years is debatable. But almost certainly not.

[McGrain]

Greater professionalism in the sport = better fighters

...I don't actually know what this means...

2) Superior technique

Not so far as I can see. But I'm prepared to admit I may be missing something.

3) All sports evolve, so this one must too

Boxing is special.

4) More rest in between fights

This is a good one. But anyone who argues, "a modern fighter would be more rested than a past fighter so would be more likely to win" is grasping - because the reverse is also true.

5) Safer amateur fights

This should be in another thread entitled, "reasons past boxers would beat modern boxers.

[The Whaler]

I think cross was joking.

[cross_trainer]

...I don't actually know what this means...


Something like...

"Fighters are more likely to be full-time professional athletes, whereas guys like Walcott were working on the docks. They also have a greater amount of money at their disposal to train, more backing, and a larger support staff."

I call this Argumentum ad Cinderellamanicus.

[BewareofDawg]

Both for heavyweights and for the other weights.

Go.
Heavyweights......size.

Other weights......Floyd mayweather is boxing NOW, not back then :yep

[Amsterdam]

Some are flat out supernatural, old guys are just legendary.

Supernatural>Legendary.

Your entire attempt here CT is now debunked.:yep

[cross_trainer]

Some are flat out supernatural, old guys are just legendary.

Supernatural>Legendary.

Your entire attempt here CT is now debunked.:yep

Usually legendary people are pretty good at beating supernatural stuff. St. George and the Dragon, Beowulf and Grendel, Red Riding Hood and an anthropomorphic wolf...

Now, if modern fighters were more scientific....

[The Whaler]

Boxers are prettier on average these days. Back then they all had lumpy heads and flat noses.

Also: no Jean-Francois Bergeron. Seriously, was boxing even worth watching back in the day?

[McGrain]

I call this Argumentum ad Cinderellamanicus.

Niiiiiiice.

[McGrain]

Seriously, was boxing even worth watching back in the day?

The majority certainly seemed to think so.

But I think that the reason that so many more people watch other sports as opposed to boxing is that those sports have improved, whereas boxing has remained the same in terms of quality.

Bar the 12 rounds instead of 15. That obviously made boxing worse to watch.

[cross_trainer]

Boxers are prettier on average these days. Back then they all had lumpy heads and flat noses.

Also: no Jean-Francois Bergeron. Seriously, was boxing even worth watching back in the day?

Yes, yes. Appearances and Bergeron are givens.

But what else is there? And why?

[Amsterdam]

Usually legendary people are pretty good at beating supernatural stuff. St. George and the Dragon, Beowulf and Grendel, Red Riding Hood and an anthropomorphic wolf...

Now, if modern fighters were more scientific....

Could Joe Louis beat Bergeron? A prime, focused Bergeron.

[The Whaler]

The majority certainly seemed to think so.

But I think that the reason that so many more people watch other sports as opposed to boxing is that those sports have improved, whereas boxing has remained the same in terms of quality.

Bar the 12 rounds instead of 15. That obviously made boxing worse to watch.

Yes, but once again may I remind you: No Jean-Francois Bergeron. Without him, boxing was like mashed potatoes without the gravy.

[cross_trainer]

Could Joe Louis beat Bergeron? A prime, focused Bergeron.

Joe Louis could not beat Bergeron prime-for-dead. Which would never happen anyway, because Bergeron cannot die.

[unitas]

Both for heavyweights and for the other weights.

Go.

roids:hey

and tshernobyl in some eastern euro cases ( see sasquatsh aka valuev)

[cross_trainer]

Without him, boxing was like mashed potatoes without the gravy.

Without him, boxing is like mashed potatoes without mashed potatoes, gravy, eating utensils, a plate, and the human race.

[The Whaler]

Without him, boxing is like mashed potatoes without mashed potatoes, gravy, eating utensils, a plate, and the human race.

Boxing needs Bergeron, just like Kathy Lee needs Regis.

[box03]

Fighters are bigger, thats it. Fighters now are not as tough as older fighters, now you have fighters quiting on there stools instead of going out like a man. Even the toughest fighters seem to now quit instead of going out on there back, guys like Tyson, Vitali, Brewster all gave up.

[cross_trainer]

Boxing needs Bergeron, just like Kathy Lee needs oxygen.

Fixed.

[cross_trainer]

Seriously, though...please post any other reasons or arguments for modern fighters being better than "old timers". Can no one take up the challenge?

[cross_trainer]

Lonely...

Oh so lonely...

[nervousxtian]

I want to say that diet and exercise and the science behind it are better now adays, but then again I honestly feel very few fighters benefit from it, since I don't know how many use it to an advantage.

The ability to analyze lots of tape on fighters in the digital age, but this would be as much of an advantage to both (considering you moved past into present)

I do think guys are bigger in their own weight class (yes, weight is the same, but size isn't always consistent to weight, but people are bigger, and the ability to drain weight to make weight, along with new diets, can mean you can in fact be a better inshape 147 with a bigger frame and more strength than say 1950) This of course assumes that someone is using a workout/diet program that is high-tech and state-of-the-art. Not every fighter does.

The biggest thing I think is that more guys are full-time fighters, and with only 2 to 3 fights a year, they have a lot of time to train and focus on fighting, assuming they actually use the time effectivley, but the money in the game today gives that option to more fighters. They don't have to take tomato can fights monthly to make a living.

Of course, the added money could also be considered a negative, as it causes some fighters to lose the hunger when they are rich, and leads to them getting complacent and distracted.

Hmm.. the Bergeron argument is also good though.

...also no Reggie Strickland.

[MrStayman]

Something that happens in most sports is old-timer nostalgia. In basketball, you have people claiming that athletes from the 1950s with half the foot speed would kill modern stars.

It's ironic, because in the few sports in which we can directly compare current performers to old timers, modern athletes are far superior. For example, track and field.

[MrStayman]

As for a reason - well, people are better athletes these days.

[cross_trainer]

Something that happens in most sports is old-timer nostalgia. In basketball, you have people claiming that athletes from the 1950s with half the foot speed would kill modern stars.

It's ironic, because in the few sports in which we can directly compare current performers to old timers, modern athletes are far superior. For example, track and field.

The measurable sports you allude to include:

* Olympic weightlifting
* Powerlifting
* Track and field
* Swimming (to some degree)

Any others I'm missing?

[MrStayman]

The measurable sports you allude to include:

* Olympic weightlifting
* Powerlifting
* Track and field
* Swimming (to some degree)

Any others I'm missing?

:think
Cycling
Sharpshooting
Kayaking

:think
Baseball, in terms of homerun count.

[unitas]

Both for heavyweights and for the other weights.

Go.

tv. makes you look bigger. adds at least ten pounds. valuev is only 5´10 in real life...:-(

[nervousxtian]

The one thing boxing has going for is that the idea and technology of the sport has changed so little since the gloved era has begun.

Sure rings are better for the most part, gloves more consistent. Yet with the weight limits of classes, you more or less can compare one era to the other much easier.

I think nostaligia overrates the past too much though.

[rodney]

Not always....
Heavyweights are bigger --- sure.
Check out the other divisions where fighters must way the same.

[cuchulain]

Nice avatar. Mine is a self-portrait too.


Botox ?

[cross_trainer]

:think
Cycling
Sharpshooting
Kayaking

:think
Baseball, in terms of homerun count.

Sharpshooting is rather borderline, and baseball is dependent on the quality of the opponents. But cycling is especially good for our purposes.

[codeman99998]

Is it just size for the HWs really? I mean, 80 years ago I doubt middleweights were as big as Jermaine Taylor or Kelly Pavlik.

Lighter schedules means you can cut weight for a fight easier. I'm not 100% sure about the numbers or anything, but I imagine that fighters of today cut weight better than fighters of long ago.

[joeboxer]

Both for heavyweights and for the other weights.

Go.i'm not sure they would have an edge at other weights. for heavyweights you would have to make it fair by putting either the modern fighter at the old nutritional and training standards and the old fighter at the modern standards.

[Sakura]

Most are probably gays, so old folks stay far away to win fights..newbies UD

[China_hand_Joe]

- Superior physical training in part due to better knowledge on training methods, knowing the existance of different kind of muscles fibres - the benifits of this are generally visible on tape, where bar a Robinson here and there, the top level fighters todays visibly look quicker.

- Globalisation of the sport, the influx of Mexicans and Asians at the lower weights makes the benifit here quite apparent.

- Steroids and legal supplements

- Fighters fight less frequently now, though it has a tiny negative effect of experience, the fact that these frequent fights effect training mean there is an overall benifit to todays way.

- Videos of old fighters can now be studied, the volume of such libaries obviously increases over time.

- Easier to fly in foreign sparring partners.

- Fighters are larger at all weights.

- Fighters tend to live the lives of professional athletes now.

[radianttwilight]

CHJ's got it.

[China_hand_Joe]

You'd think so, but people will deny these things, and we end up going round in circles, with arguments like the following.

"But what about global warming and pollution? The air and heat must effect todays fighters and make then inferior to their 1940s counterparts."

[Toopretty]

Modern fighters have better hand wrap. Those old school guys just didnt have the quality. Also, modern fighters take more showers and wax there body hair off more making them more sleek and aerodynamic.

[The Whaler]

You just have to look Bergeron to get your answer. He dominated Greek pancration, and during the London Prize Ring era he slapped on an obviously fake mustache and called himself "John L. Sullivan" and dominated that as well. The fact that he is just as dominant as a gloved boxer proves that old fighters are just as good as modern ones.