This "old vs new" recent onslaught

TBH, it's too bad that this new fella has chosen to go about his crusade in such an odd way.

It's the incessant cut/paste that ruins it for me. From the looks of it, this guy made a couple of YouTube videos, and is pushing them like a used-car salesman trying to meet his quota. There's nothing wrong with making YouTube videos, obviously. But don't cut/paste responses to anyone who wants to engage. It's an immediate turn-off, and could easily be interpreted as trolling.

It's a shame, IMO... because some of his arguments probably have merit. Of course, I wouldn't have chosen George Foreman as the poster boy of today's heavyweights in trying to push the boxing skill and movement argument.

Yesterday vs Today is always going to be a fascinating argument in boxing. I do agree we sometimes get too enamoured with past, black-and-white legends, and close our minds to anything we might consider heresy. Today's size is something that cannot be ignored. You can't just throw a past heavyweight who barely cracked 200 pounds (if that much) against a 250-pound behemoth from today, and expect good results.

Styles have changed too, it must be said. Hell... go back to the beginning of boxing and you'll see the funny-looking, arms curled up, boxing style. Fighters of today would've swept the ring with them inside one round.

So there's a way to make a point.

His videos do not even make his point.

He seems to have bumped up a lot of my older threads and I can't figure out what the main point is other than that the modern-day heavy weights would blast the older ones out who could not even according to him land any significant punches due to lack of foot and head moment and size

When comparing contemporary fighters to those from previous eras, the rose tinted spectacles come out and any good sense goes out the window. I was speaking to someone today who came out with the classic. Todays heavyweights wouldn't have been competitive in Lennox Lewis's era. Clearly on the back of every Tom Dick and Harry boxing "content creator" regurgitating Lewis's back and forth with Hearn re: AJ Ngannou. I get it, it's the safe bet and everyone just seems to love using the 'all day long' phrase.

What people are actually saying is that Lewis would beat them all isn't it. He might well do. But to say Fury, AJ, Wilder and Usyk wouldn't be competitive is beyond fucking stupid. Frank Bruno was competitive. Ray Mercer was competitive. Hasim fucking Rahman and Oliver McCall were so competitive, they chinned him out with a single hit. None of them elite or anywhere approaching. By all means back Lewis to beat todays top four, I'd probably agree. But lets not pretend that they're not a level or two above old Frank et al.

Another nugget. Past fighters get an awful lot of credit for beating ordinary opposition. Opposition who over the passing of time get elevated beyond their station. Ray Mercer is a classic. The administrator of one of the most brutal beatdowns in boxing history and an immoveable object for Lennox Lewis one night over ten rounds. He's infamous no? When people ask the question on Facebook and the like. Who wins, Ray Mercer or Anthony Joshua. Lots of really thick people will put Anthony Joshua's head in the way of seven or eight unanswered blows, just like poor Tommy's was. And they will surmise that under those circumstances Mercer wins. And they'd be right. What they don't acknowledge, is that the chances of that happening are slim to none, and as inspired as he might have been over the shorter distance with Lewis for one night only, virtually everyone of anything like class went the distance with Mercer. This brutal foregone conclusion people have in their simple heads just ain't happening.

Another classic. Hagler V Golovkin. Oh Hagler would knock him out early! Fuck off!!! As a side note. This is my favourite fantasy fight. Technically excellent, but more importantly a bloodbath of biblical proportions.

I don’t get involved in the newbie’s stupidity, but what I would say, is that when comparing different fighters in different eras , you have to give both fighters access to the same facilities, same infrastructure, same society , same science and take into consideration size changes in the World from each era.
Also differences in weigh in times and days etc. etc.

Oh for sure. If these questions are posed earnestly then there is no right or wrong answer. You'd like to think that the level of the principals involved is such that it makes for debate rather than ridicule. The sweeping old beats new stuff is what does my head in.

Another old v new classic. Who wins "prime for prime". You can bet your bottom dollar that the new hasn't had a prime yet.

Imagine, with a good translator, and a Time Machine, Julius Caesar meeting any current world leader for a televised debate... Who would be more graceful, wily, diplomatic, sophisticated and wise? Who'd come off the better statesman?

Who knows. Maybe Keir Starmer outclasses ol Julius ❗

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoSavingByTheBell

Imagine, with a good translator, and a Time Machine, Julius Caesar meeting any current world leader for a televised debate... Who would be more graceful, wily, diplomatic, sophisticated and wise? Who'd come off the better statesman?

Who knows. Maybe Keir Starmer outclasses ol Julius ❗

---

Julius Caesar Chavez beat Starmer any day of the week.

Hypotheticals are a staple on any given board and sports discussion. Timeless. I've never had a problem with them and anything that can add to learning the sport, dabbling in fighters otherwise looked at as irrelevant now and furthering genuine honest discussion is something we should all have time for. I think fans get spoiled and don't take advantage of the living history that we have at our fingertips. We could not do that less than 3 decades ago. Boxing didn't start with us and it won't end with us, we're just another gaggle of fans living and witnessing another era. And as with others, this era too shall pass. But hypotheticals are exactly that, an unknown an uncertainty and cannot be 'proven'. All you can do is go by what you've lived live and watched unfold in your own time and delve into footage with an open mind. More importantly maintain a grip on the reality that in boxing anything can happen. The fuckery and unthinkable happening on any given night are very very real. So approaching it with a cemented absolute declaration one way or the other based on agenda or bias or tarzan talking buffoonery we'll you're just not a genuine individual.

But honestly it would be so heartbreaking also for example if say a guy like Ken Norton absolutely destroyed joe Louis or jack Dempsey.... Heartbreaking because their great invincible aura over the decades would be shattered by a guy like Norton ...not knocking him at all he's pretty great, but most people think of Louis or Dempsey as more say invincible and intimidating than Kenny.... Get ready for the heartbreaking shockers like say Joe Frazier absolutely demolishes jack Johnson or even more heartbreaking and AURA-SHATTERING let's say Pinklon Thomas ANNIHILATES Sonny Liston.....