Down goes Joshua!

[bpo57]

One thing to consider is that current fighters haven't finished their resume yet. What if Joshua does what Lewis did and comes back to crush Ruiz and remains champ for most of a decade? it could happen, (Lewis looked just as bad in his losses). That would change his evaluation. The top fighters of the past have completed their achievements and their careers are set in stone in our minds.

And of course, citing the best fighters of an era is cherry picking. What about Leon Spinks, Michael Dokes, Greg Page, Trevor Berbick, Frank Bruno, Buster Douglas. How do they compare to the guys who happen to be champions in this moment? The best fighters of any era are going to be pretty good. You just don't know who they will be until the era is over.

Your second paragraph highlights the depth that existed back then. For the most part those were second tier fighters.

 

[bpo57]

Lewis, Bowe and Klitschko are part of the current era, in the heavyweight division, which began in the 1990's. When boxing started, most heavyweights were what we would now call light heavyweights, a division that didn't exist until 1903. Guys like Corbett and Fitisimmons would be light heavyweights now. By that time heavyweights had grown to be what we now call cruiserweights, a division that didn't exist until 1980. Since the 60's the top contenders had all been in the 220 pound range, so they created a division for boxers who were 175-190, (now it's 200). Even Frazier was about 210. there were no more Marcianos or Pattersons contending for the heavyweight title. Beginning with Bowe and Lewis, the division moved up another notch to where all the contenders are at least 6-5 or 6-6 and 240+ pounds, except Ruiz who is 6-2 but 268. Wilder at 220 pounds, is a small heavyweight these days, despite his 6-7 height, (he's a sort of heavyweight Tommy Hearns - skinny but with a huge punch). If they create a superheavyweight division, (as they should), Frazier or Tyson would not have fought in it. The fact that they may have beaten guys that size doesn't mean they should be fighting a steady diet of them. that's why there are weight classes.

You mentioned that a lightweight could not beat a middleweight unless there was large gap in their skill level. When Frazier and Tyson beat bigger guys there was such a gap and they exploited it. But look at Frazier vs. Foreman and Tyson vs. Lewis. They didn't look like they belonged in the same ring together. if you saw two guys fighting in a bar and one was 135 pounds, (a lightweight) and the other 150 pounds, (a middleweight), would that tell you who would win? Not really. But I think you'd agree that if they were both professional fighters the 150 pound guy will probably be the victor. You'd find the 135 pounder fighting as a lightweight against other 135 pounders and the middleweight fighting against other 150 pounders. the 135 pounder could beat a 150 pounder, but he shouldn't have to try to win a championship against a world of them. Why would it be any different for a 220 pounder vs. a 250 pounder? Maybe if he had Wilder's punch...

I wasn't aware this era of boxing started 20-25 years ago. I take your point that a good big man will beat a good big man nearly all of the time. But for the record, Ali, Holmes and Foreman were not little men. They were pretty big dudes but most importantly they were great boxers. Something current heavyweights fall far short imo.

 

[bpo57]

1) To narrow that down I'd say boxers vs athletes. I believe there was some insane training regiments back in the day, and ring work and sparring are just that. They actually had to work toward much longer fights back then, so in some respects, I think there were boxers back in the day were better conditioned than today. Actually most of the time in any sport, I usually have an old school bias. I think I have had a good steady diet of watching boxing my entire life starting when I was 5 or 6, without much of a break through today. We watch almost every Saturday night, or I'll have fights recorded and watch later. In our house hold growing up, my step dad made it mandatory we watch every and any fight on tv (so glad he did that). He also was friends with Ron Lyle they both lived and grew up here in Parkhill, Denver. I had a few friends growing up who boxed seriously, and 2 that had quick stints as pros.

We also go to many local boxing matches, and my current favorite, Andrew Strode 6-0(google him) signed to train with Roger Mayweather. My girlfriend went to school with Andrews dad and we met and talked with them a few times.

2) I didn't try to say today's heavyweights are as good or anywhere near it today, as they were back then. Heavyweights were boxing back then, complete opposite of today. I was making a point of who could give somebody a fight. I was responding to this;
Boxing may be the only sport where the current stars would get crushed by the greats from yesteryear. Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Holyfield, Tyson et al would destroy the current crop of heavyweights.
I think that went a little overboard, just my .02

I respect the hell out of all the old time greats in the middle/lightweight divisions, it's just that being unbiased, I can't see one of them landing as many punches on Lomachenko as they did on all of their opponents back in the day. Have you watched him fight? He had a subpar outing 2 fights ago, but he was recovering from a broken hand. Have you seen this guys training regiment? It's insane and innovative the way his dad has him going.

My comment about past heavyweights crushing current ones prolly did go overboard but I just think the comparison of old/current boxers vs old/current athletes is rather stark imo.

I watched Lomachenko once on HBO against Walters in the fight u referenced earlier where Walters didn't get off his stool. He has fought as a featherweight and lightweight and just to be clear I was focused more on the welter/middleweights. I admit that those comparisons are far more debatable than the heavyweights.

One little factoid on Duran. He was the lightweight champion of the world in 1972, held that title for six years and then in 2000 fought as a super middleweight at the age of 49. Looking at the list of guys he fought is truly incredible. I've watched a replay of the first Leonard/Duran fight a few times. That was a classic. Btw Ring Magazine voted Duran as the 5th greatest fighter of the last 80 years.

 

[bpo57]

One last thing on old v new. I think Hearns, Leonard or Duran would have kicked Floyd Mayweather's butt. JMHO.

 

[ssbriefcase]

Btw Ring Magazine voted Duran as the 5th greatest fighter of the last 80 years.

Yep, and Loma is literally just getting started, so there's a ton to be written and awards will be given out. Spence and Crawford aren't far behind, very young. All are going to have their place in history, on the good side I believe.

 

[SWC75]

I wasn't aware this era of boxing started 20-25 years ago. I take your point that a good big man will beat a good big man nearly all of the time. But for the record, Ali, Holmes and Foreman were not little men. They were pretty big dudes but most importantly they were great boxers. Something current heavyweights fall far short imo.

That was when the top contenders started to look more like basketball players than football players, thus creating a new era. My point is that the heavyweight division, unlike the the other weight classes, grows and becomes a different division and the weight classes need to acknowledge that.

 

[bpo57]

Yep, and Loma is literally just getting started, so there's a ton to be written and awards will be given out. Spence and Crawford aren't far behind, very young. All are going to have their place in history, on the good side I believe.

That comment about Duran was purely just a nugget about him and not a comparative thing or anything disrespectful toward the other guys.

 

[bpo57]

That was when the top contenders started to look more like basketball players than football players, thus creating a new era. My point is that the heavyweight division, unlike the the other weight classes, grows and becomes a different division and the weight classes need to acknowledge that.

Fair enough.

 

[orangenauburn]

The difference between today and yesteryear, is the successful guys in the past by and large lived up to the mantra of Pugilistic Arts. They were skilled as well as powerful and quick.

I don't think today's boxers are as purely skilled pugilists as they the guys in the past.

 

[ssbriefcase]

The difference between today and yesteryear, is the successful guys in the past by and large lived up to the mantra of Pugilistic Arts. They were skilled as well as powerful and quick.

I don't think today's boxers are as purely skilled pugilists as they the guys in the past.

Revisionist history. There's a number of guys now that are as skilled as those back when. Read through some of the names mentioned in this thread, they are definitely out there.

 

[JAXCUSE]

Revisionist history. There's a number of guys now that are as skilled as those back when. Read through some of the names mentioned in this thread, they are definitely out there.

There are talented boxers today. But, unlike during the 70’s and 80’s (even 90’s), the current crop of best P4P fighters (Spence/Crawford, Wilder/Joshua, Loma/Garcia) DO NOT FIGHT regularly or EACH OTHER... I term it the “Mayweather effect” (Promoters stockpiling fighters and protecting the business brand rather than daring to fight the best and prove you are the best)...

My thesis - this risk aversion (fighter and promoter) has killed “average fan” interest in boxing. And MMA has taken allot of the market share accordingly.

You would not have Ali/Frazier, SRL/Hearns or even Barrera/Morales in today’s “promoter aligned protectionist environment.”

Canelo is the only exception in today’s fight game (Oscar has something to do with that - De La Hoya, his promoter, ducked no-one and made the best and regular fights). GGG is another. Holyfield (maybe Pacquiao) was probably the last “get me this guy to fight” pugilist I’ve seen. HBO made it happen for guys like Evander, Lennox, Roy Jones, Oscar, Pac.

I’ve followed Boxing closely since the early 70’s. 1st fight I saw in person was Duran/Kenny Buchanan in the Garden. Watched allot of film of the old timers from the 30’s/40’s/50’s. Here’s the difference (when compared to today) - the best fought each other and fought regularly.

Not nearly as much “marination” (Arum’s term). I do not think we’ll ever see Crawford/Spence or Mikey/Loma; at least anytime when the fighters are prime. Which is a shame...

 

[ssbriefcase]

There are talented boxers today. But, unlike during the 70’s and 80’s (even 90’s), the current crop of best P4P fighters (Spence/Crawford, Wilder/Joshua, Loma/Garcia) DO NOT FIGHT regularly or EACH OTHER... I term it the “Mayweather effect” (Promoters stockpiling fighters and protecting the business brand rather than daring to fight the best and prove you are the best)...

My thesis - this risk aversion (fighter and promoter) has killed “average fan” interest in boxing. And MMA has taken allot of the market share accordingly.

You would not have Ali/Frazier, SRL/Hearns or even Barrera/Morales in today’s “promoter aligned protectionist environment.”

Canelo is the only exception in today’s fight game (Oscar has something to do with that - De La Hoya, his promoter, ducked no-one and made the best and regular fights). GGG is another. Holyfield (maybe Pacquiao) was probably the last “get me this guy to fight” pugilist I’ve seen. HBO made it happen for guys like Evander, Lennox, Roy Jones, Oscar, Pac.

I’ve followed Boxing closely since the early 70’s. 1st fight I saw in person was Duran/Kenny Buchanan in the Garden. Watched allot of film of the old timers from the 30’s/40’s/50’s. Here’s the difference (when compared to today) - the best fought each other and fought regularly.

Not nearly as much “marination” (Arum’s term). I do not think we’ll ever see Crawford/Spence or Mikey/Loma; at least anytime when the fighters are prime. Which is a shame...

Yeah the promoters and different entities in boxing have things screwed up and as of very recently, getting worse. DAZN and these new entities getting boxers to sign with them is terrible for the fan, because of promoters drawing the line and not fighting top guys. Spence/Crawford probably won't happen.
Wilder is the most vocal and willing to unify belts of anyone, but seemingly it's not all his decision. Canelo ducked GGG for a while imo. I think boxing has rebounded well though. Now there are a lot of really good fighters and I see boxing as having taken some of it's popularity back. I see mma as losing steam in the last few years. Their stars have gone hollywood or got in too much trouble. I have friends more than ever asking me to go to boxing matches or come over for fights, which seem a lot more frequent in the last few years. It can't be just the free food, lol. I do agree 100% on the matchup problems, but the talent is there and there's some young guns who look very promising, so it's not all top heavy.

 

[SWC75]

"A guy you've heard of vs. a guy you've never heard of" is a lousy business model.

The use of the "undefeated" record as an advertising tool is problem #1. All an undefeated record means is that you haven't lost yet and so you don't know what to do to avoid it. Guys like Joshua are used to opposing fighters looking for someplace to hide and don't know what to do when the other guy comes after them. Carmen Basilio lost 10 fights and had 5 draws before his first title fight and now the Hall of Fame is in his home town. He learned what he needed to know to become a great fighter. Thank you, opponents.

The cross-cutting of boxing by slicing divisions in half, (the flyweight division, which lacks depth anyway, is cut into three pieces) and by having four different ruling bodies, each making money by sanctioning "World Championship" bouts creates 'fiefdoms' for the many 'world' champions to defend against less than the best fighters. Now they have interim, super, emeritus, silver, diamond and even 'eternal' champions, just to be able too use that word in their advertising.

Then there are the promoters, who don't want their fighters fighting those of rival promoters. Now we have fighters "signing" with TV networks who want similar exclusivity. The fights people want to see will be even harder to come by. And MMA, who gives the public what they want, will get a greater and greater share of the market.

What boxing needs is an annual tournament in whole divisions, (Flyweight, Bantamweight, featherweight, Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Light heavyweight, Middle heavyweight, heavyweight and Super heavyweight). Pick the top 8 fighters in each division and have the quarterfinals in the spring, the semi-finals in the summer and the finals in the fall. If someone actually set that up, the current fighters would not participate, of course, because their managers, promoters and the other "suits" would lose power. But the public would surely find it more fascinating than this mess and the next generation of fighters and even the current ones would eventually be part of it because that's where the money would be. If you build it, they will come...

 

[ssbriefcase]

Good read, kind of confirmed what I thought I was seeing. Also the article is over a year old, and boxing has definitely been on the upswing in the last year, and mma down.

With MMA Losing Steam, 2018 Is Boxing’s Time to Shine

With Conor McGregor's yearlong MMA absence and Ronda Rous...

www.complex.com