Whats this about better training techniques nowadays, Im fasinated to know what they are. How is a 10st man bigger now than 40 years ago, Im openminded please enlighten me.
Printable View
Whats this about better training techniques nowadays, Im fasinated to know what they are. How is a 10st man bigger now than 40 years ago, Im openminded please enlighten me.
Roy Jones would be much better conditioned and 2 fast for archie Jones would win by stoppage in round 6 or 7
I think there is better equitment nowadays and also you have sport supplements and stuff creatine for example...An example would be perhaps the 100 metre sprint race It is now under 10 secs where over 50 years ago it was around 12 seconds,,So the human race is always getting stronger and faster,and smarter I guess...Hope this helps... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
yes but in old days they used to train harder than boxers today
Guys might be stronger but they aren't as tough...at least in my opinionQuote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
In 1936 the world record 10/2 broken on a cinder track, without the competition there is today[ it was a minor sport with no money involved]Boxing was at its peak as far as numbers taking part , economics of the time, hard times breed hard men. they say that when Owens broke the record if it had been on an all weather track it would have been 9 /7, without drugs
shoes were crap and track was crappy aswell not like standards now id like to see athelets run on the track they had to run on and get 9.77  ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel2smooth79
That is also a very valid point ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Well, it's not his fault he was born in the generation where he has that advantage. But what about the modern training? Does RJJs skills and talent as you know not good enough to beat any SMW/LHW. Even the guys from any era had the modern training RJJ had I don't think they can beat RJJ.Quote:
Originally Posted by amat
Thanks
Roy Jones is R J because of his father, from a child he was kicked up the arse by his dad to have the work ethic he had. If you like old school principles, there was no magic new ideas what made R J it was discipline. What destroyed Roy was new ideas of losing new found muscle and not having the time to adapt to the problems it caused
Well that's all speculation. But there were big fights to big made for RJJ, and he didn't make them. Great fighters have big fights. RJJ had no big fights aside from Ruiz. He has wins over big names, like Toney and Hopkins, but didn't face either while they were in their prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintymen
Again, if it were Who Is The Best Fighter ever to fight at each individual division then it would be a different story. But this is Greatest. And Greatest is predicated on things like big fights, longgevity, quality of competition etc. Actual talent doesn't factor in when comparing fighters of different eras. At least in my opinion it doesn't.
Um ....WHAT?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
RJJ lost because he didn't block 1 punch then he got gunshy and lost 3 more times. RJJ was disciplined and dedicated much more than most any other fighter in his era....perhaps Mosley and De la Hoya were closest to his level.
Lyle I would like to think that someone like you who likes to analyse and review things in depth would do that also for boxing topics and not just for all those other threads you create in the hidden board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
To say that Manny Pac is the 'GREATEST' cuz thats what the title states is quite honest absurd. And don't stretch my comments out and over do it. Manny has had 2 huge victories in his career.
His win over MAB was at 126 (Featherweight) not Super Feather. So thats that.
He then faught JMM also at 126 and got lucky with a Draw.
At 130 Super Feather where 'you' list him as the GREATEST hes like this;
He faught Erik and lost a UD
He the faught Hector Velasquez (42-10) not a World Class fighter by any means
He then rematched Erik in TKO'ed him in a very fashionable way
His last outing was against a 'natural' Super Bantamweight Oscar Larios thats 2 weight classes above. Thats like Pacquiao fighting JLC, Cotto or Hatton at 140. I give Larios props for taking the fight after all his career is winding down and I'm sure he was hoping for a miracle that night.
So as you can see, or should I say from what I can see he hasnt done anything GREAT at 130 to be considered the GREATEST there. Hes 1-1 with Erik and has beaten 2 other guys. In all honesty I cant see how you can say he will overshadow MABs career if he keeps on. Now that when you talk about MAB in the feature people will always bring up Pac thats a different story. But remember Sanchez beat Gomez badly and still that doesnt take ANY credibilty away from Gomez and what a GREAT career he had.
So if Pacquiaos the GREATEST at Super Featherweight then damn!!! where does that leave; Alexis, MAB & Azumah ???
And I know you put 'IF' Paquaio continues like this, still at this moment hes not there yet.
By the way quit using BoxRec as your source I've told you before their ratings are way off.
Flyweight - Pancho Villa
Bantamweight - Carlos Zarate
Super Bantamweight - Wilfredo Gomez
Featherweight - Wille Pepp
Superfeatherweight - Marco Antonio Barrera
Lightweight - (tie) Roberto Duran and Shane Mosley and Pernell Whitaker
Lightwelterweight - Pernell Whitaker
Welterweight - Sugar Ray Robinson
Middleweight - (tie) Marvin Hagler and Bernard Hopkins
Super Middleweight - Roy Jones Jr
Light Heavyweight - Archie Moore
Cruiserweight - Evander Holyfield
Heavyweight - Muhammad Ali
Lyle see what I mean about Gomez desptite Gomez loss to Sanchez you just can't black out the great career he had. (look at Starrs post)