Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
The abuse and resistance I met on another thread led me to ask these questions...
I think that certain fighters of the past would have been severely challenged in today's HW division where not only has there been an evolution in the styles of current boxers due to the increased power of punches making outside game and defence a higher priority and European influence evident, a greater athleticism through modern diet, training and medicine but also that the weights of the boxers are 20lbs heavier on average today or so.
I think from Tyson in the mid 80's onward we see a different class of boxers altogether than we did previous.
The "Golden Age" imo is a bit of a joke, that era was riddled with boxers that would amount to mismatches and fast KO's for most any modern HW. As evidenced by the fact it was championed by a punch weak half blind dwarf with no chin, a big lug who could barely box and a skinny kid who shoe shined his way through the 60's who later turned into a fat punch bag and hugged his way through the 70's.
If that was the Golden age I am not impressed! The 90's was the REAL golden age! And Most of today's HW's would likely roll over those ancient pugilists imo.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Had to be said... There is far too much tolerance for the "old time nutbag" in the boxing community. It's in other sports too but carried to almost religious extremes in boxing and worst of all at HW!
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Comparing eras in HW boxing is tough. Gotta be careful with the assumption that just because today's fighters are taller and heavier, that they're better. I admit to being one of the biggest critics of today's heavyweights, and I'll tell you why.
It seems like more than ever, washed-up, retired HW's are deciding to come back. Maybe just for the money.... maybe because they see what's out there and think "Hey, maybe I've got a shot." It's pathetic.
Just as pathetic, there are fighters out there who see heavyweight as a division they can bloat up to, without giving up the double-cheeseburgers, or without having to run further than the corner McDonalds. They think all they need is that one "haymaker" to get the KO and grab a piece of the pie (literally). That's the kind of thinking that results in blobs like Fat Ass Toney still hanging around and embarrassing himself and the sport. I think in the past, heavyweights generally at least gave the impression of wanting to be athletes. They were never all chiseled.... but at least they could climb into the ring without looking like sumo wrestlers with gloves.
"Klitschko-fear" has ruined the division. Never have I seen fighters come into the ring so meekly, just wanting to survive and collect their paycheck. In those rare occasions a fighter does come to fight, Wlad will grab and clinch and maul and just ruin a perfectly good fight. Even when George Foreman was terrorizing the division, fighters generally came to fight, even if they weren't very successful. Eventually, Foreman met Ali, and the rest is history.
So while it may be debatable as to what era has been better.... I think it's less debatable that today's heavyweights are a bore to watch, and have drained interest in the division.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
A very respectable opinion Tito and I am glad you took time to explain your position on the modern HW's.
I personally find modern HW boxing far more entertaining than that of the 60's or 70's or early 80's but from the rise of Mike Tyson to the end of Vitali Klitschko's first career which I feel to have been the most exciting I do see a decline in "excitement", not in all fights or fighters but in the general atmosphere. There are some exceptions. This I feel may be more to do with the fact that because I was always a fan of English and American commentary (particularly HBO) and now that championship fights are fought in Germany and have foreign commentary most of the time they lack the same atmosphere that the American based fights did. And of course Vitali's last few years have been not so explosive as his past days and Wladimir is now a kill joy for the division.
I do find it easier on the eyes than the 60's or 70's however. I just watched FOTC again this morning and I gotta tell ya, what a stinker! And also what weaklings they were. You certainly get the impression that any of us probably could have handled those punches and both men seemed absolutely blind to punches! And this was one of the BEST performances!
There will always be old timers and always have been who will return for comebacks. Boxing esp HW is one sport where a fatter, middle aged opponent with far greater experience can defeat his younger more athletic opponent with less seasoning.
I think you will find there were just as many out of shape fighters in the old days as now. A few guys like Chris Arreola has appeared in previous fights was not representative of the division as a whole. Imo there tends to be more of a "bodybuilder" type image going around at HW boxing today. James Toney is just an individual making a mockery of himself, not the sport.
Anyhow I am concentrating purely on their effectiveness here not their entertainment value. Were the Klitschko's or top contenders really to be threatened by the sort of opponents like were around in the 70's and 60's then they would be there now. Far too many have critiqued the modern era as being "weak" in light of zero evidence and plenty to suggest the contrary.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
"one of the strongest eras in reality?"
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
90s was not the golden age.
Whatever the current age of boxing, it will always be criticized because the past is seen with rose-tinted spectacles.
Having two champions for past ten years who would not fight each other has killed heavyweight boxing.
Boxing greats have come from poverty, rap music has taken potential boxers and gave the false promise of a quick return in music business.
I see the current generation of heavyweights as one of the best ever.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Calling Frazier a weak half blind dwarf with no chin, Foreman a big lug who could barely box and Ali a skinny kid who shoe shined his way through the 60's who later turned into a fat punch bag and hugged his way through the 70's means you are a prat.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
It could also mean that other thing too @Master ... Being "Objective"! Otherwise known as "realistic".
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
They shone very brightly, would we be talking about Ademek and Grant 40 years from now?
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
They shone very brightly, would we be talking about Ademek and Grant 40 years from now?
If boxing was doing its due diligence in promoting the sport, yes.
I'm not saying other eras were bad or good, I'm saying this era from the end of Lennox Lewis' career to now has been held to a standard so high there's no way it could deliver. You guys watch the 2nd longest reigning heavyweight champion and all we hear about are complaints about his style or his opposition and comparisons to fighters who are nothing like him.
People are very quick to be negative when they could appreciate what they have.
Re: Modern HW boxing: Weak era OR one of the strongest eras in reality?
Additionally people forget how heavily hyped Grant was and before he met Lewis, he was considered the "next big thing". He had a solid record. He is a great example of a super heavyweight puncher that although losing later in life when he was not the same fighter, his loss to Lewis was so fast simply because he attacked Lenny too hard too quick, got caught and paid the price. Imagine if it were Grant who landed a money shot first in that violent slugfest? I think Grant showed great heart by getting up 6 times against Lewis, a feat that Joe Frazier gets ample credit for against George Foreman!
But because Michael Grant is not named Joe Frazier he doesn't get the same respect even though Grant was far more dangerous for Lennox than Joe was for George. In his next fight, Grant was dropped by McCline but the real reason he was out was because he smashed his ankle (or was it knee) and couldn't walk let alone fight!
Anyway the point is clear, people will be talking about all of these boxers into the far future the same as we are today regarding the old ones. I would not be one bit surprised if 50 years from now we'll be looking back saying how much better this era was and how the division is in a terrible state today. Every era was considered weak and boxing has apparently been dying for a hundred years until after the era is over and then it is viewed in a brighter light. It happened to Lewis, and it will happen to the Klitschko's too. It's just that the love for Lewis and even more so for the Klitschko's will not feel as strong in the US as it did for the golden age fighters (or Tyson or Holyfield) because they were good old American heroes. But overall abroad they are paid there dues already you can be assured of that!
