Question about a fighters "prime" / "past his best"

Does AGE determine whether or not a fighter is "past his best?"

Age of the current Ring P4P 10
1. Pacquiao (29) 2 weeks from 30
2. Marquez (35)
3. Calzaghe (36)
4. Hopkins (43)
5. Vazquez (30)
6. Margarito (30)
7. RMarquez (33)
8. Cotto (27)
9. Calderon (33)
10. Hatton (30)

These are the 10 BEST fighters in the WORLD (according to The Ring). Only Cotto is in his 20s.

Surely ANY win against a fighter rated TOP 10 in the world CAN NOT be downplayed, right? Yet fans/writers make excuses for fighters losses, because of old AGE, all the time.

Isn't this a contradiction?

Thoughts?

I dont think it does,These days most fighters excluding Hatton from your list keep they selves fit all year round and that helps.I think it has to do with how many wars you have been in and if you are still motivated my training.

It all depends on the fighter,some guys age better then others. Jones is clearly spent, I suspect Tarver is as well. Hopkins is older then I am, and he's in impeccable condition. Injuries and activity can catch one guy, and another one can just keep trucking right through it all

There is alway an exception where some fighters peak very early like Tyson then fade quickly.

It depends on the fighter, and the fighs they've had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Does AGE determine whether or not a fighter is "past his best?"

Age of the current Ring P4P 10
1. Pacquiao (29) 2 weeks from 30
2. Marquez (35)
3. Calzaghe (36)
4. Hopkins (43)
5. Vazquez (30)
6. Margarito (30)
7. RMarquez (33)
8. Cotto (27)
9. Calderon (33)
10. Hatton (30)

These are the 10 BEST fighters in the WORLD (according to The Ring). Only Cotto is in his 20s.

Surely ANY win against a fighter rated TOP 10 in the world CAN NOT be downplayed, right? Yet fans/writers make excuses for fighters losses, because of old AGE, all the time.

Isn't this a contradiction?

Thoughts?

---

No it doesn't it all depends on how many fights they've had, the amount of tough fights they've had. The shape they've kept themselves in. Moving up in a weightclass or moving down in a weightclass, loads of things come into it.

I'm specifically talking about guys 30+ - STILL P4P ranked - that on suffering a loss immediately get excused by - he was "past his best" "not prime" "shot"

Obviously a guy like Roy Jones is past is best.. that's why he's not P4P ranked.

But ANY guy P4P, whatever their age, the guy that beats them should have his win lauded without having attached an "old".. "past his prime/best" .. "shot" .. to sour the win, no?

I think the terms "prime" and "past his best" and "shot" are just used for arguments and excuses.

I deem a fighter in his "prime" when he is giving his best string of performances. But physically, it typically happens between the ages of 27-30. When I see a fighter consistently slipping in skills or performances then I start viewing them "past their best." Key word being CONSISTENTLY because everyone throws in a bad performance now and there.

I think age has nothing to do with it. Well not nothing but it's not as important as people make it seem. I think mileage and tough fights take it's toll on fighters more than age.

I feel it is a contradiction as any current top ten p4p fighter thats 30 plus that suffers defeat should not have age as an excuse for that, neither should the victory of the winning opponent be deemed as less valuable because of the older opponent, this is more specific to the p4p list, & because of that reason, as they are seen to be current fighters who are at the top,

& if they are currently in the top 10 p4p & active, by the very nature of reaching & being active at that level, that should make the old & past it argument a none starter with more plaudits going to the victor..

Or something like that :lolololol:


:badass::badass::badass:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Does AGE determine whether or not a fighter is "past his best?"

Age of the current Ring P4P 10
1. Pacquiao (29) 2 weeks from 30
2. Marquez (35)
3. Calzaghe (36)
4. Hopkins (43)
5. Vazquez (30)
6. Margarito (30)
7. RMarquez (33)
8. Cotto (27)
9. Calderon (33)
10. Hatton (30)

These are the 10 BEST fighters in the WORLD (according to The Ring). Only Cotto is in his 20s.

Surely ANY win against a fighter rated TOP 10 in the world CAN NOT be downplayed, right? Yet fans/writers make excuses for fighters losses, because of old AGE, all the time.

Isn't this a contradiction?

Thoughts?

---

No it doesn't it all depends on how many fights they've had, the amount of tough fights they've had. The shape they've kept themselves in. Moving up in a weightclass or moving down in a weightclass, loads of things come into it.

---

I am actually going to change it to how well they adapt, and how good of shape they remain in year round.

Fighters that adapt to their slowing reflexes and skills, and people who stay healthy by living as healthy as possible are way better off than even guys who train hard or in their prime look amazing. I think all those other factors are icing on the cake, but a true master of the sport who fully dedicates themselves to the sport thrive over the long run, only a handful of guys like Monzon can get away with doing otherwise.

Better training methods, nutrition, etc. And careful career choices. When you look at that top ten though you definitrly can't bring age into arguments about whether they would have lost a certain fight if they'd been younger. The worst thing about that top ten is the lack of any youngsters coming through. Hopefully guys like JuanMa crash that list in the next year or so.

Older guys Have always been about. It just seems at the moment theres nothing coming through. Having said that the first time I heard that argument was 1958 ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey

It all depends on the fighter,some guys age better then others. Jones is clearly spent, I suspect Tarver is as well. Hopkins is older then I am, and he's in impeccable condition. Injuries and activity can catch one guy, and another one can just keep trucking right through it all

---

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scrap

Older guys Have always been about. It just seems at the moment theres nothing coming through. Having said that the first time I heard that argument was 1938 ;D

---

Cheers Scrap...

:)

Right.. so everyone agrees "prime" / "past his best" has nothing to do with age.

So no-one will use that excuse should ANY of the 30-plussers from that P4P list lose next time out.

And, for example, no-one has ever said Kostya Tszyu was "past his best" when losing to Ricky Hatton. Because he was still ranked P4P no.3 by The Ring, so clearly still at the very top of his game ;)

Thanks.

I suppose science has done a lot to prolong peoples careers. Not long ago turning 30 pretty much singled the end of an athletes career. So much is known about nutrition, training, recovery etc that if athletes follow the advice and knowledge out there that they can easily perform well past 30.

A couple points:

1. Age is only a partial factor in whether a fighter is in his prime or not. Is a 27 year old fighter more likely to be in his prime than a 35 year old? Yes, of course. But there are other factors, such as the age when a fighter started his career, the number of tough fights he's had, the number of times he's killed himself to make weight.
Look at Bernard Hopkins and Erik Morales for example. One man is still fighting extremely well at age 43, the other was shot at 29. That's because Hopkins started his pro career at a late age, hasn't been in many wars, and keeps himself in great shape at all times. On the other hand, Morales was already a pro as a teenager, had one war after another, and used to blow up in between every fight and then starve himself down.

2. Why are there so many 30-something fighters in the PFP rankings right now? Part of it may just be a fluke, and part of it is because modern training and conditioning methods allow athletes to compete longer than they did in the past. And that's true in all sports, not just boxing. 30-40 years ago, there were very few pro athletes who were effective into their late 30s or 40s, now it's more commonplace. There are 40 year old baseball pitchers, football players, basketball players, etc.

I think the reason that there are so many older fighters on the P4P list is because it takes a long time to gain that type of credibility with the boxing community. Is Joe Calzaghe any different of a fighter than he was before he fought Lacy? No, but he had no resume back then. He had the same exact talent and style but no resume. It takes time to build a resume to be considered for the P4P list. This is why you have so many older fighters on the P4P list. Young fighters might have the talent but because of the matchmaking, they usually don't get involved in big fights until much later in their careers. You won't find a young guy on the P4P list unless he possesses something extremely out of the ordinary and special (i.e. RJJ and Mayweather Jr.).

Look at fighters like Jorge Linares, Andre Berto, Juan Manuel Lopez, or Chad Dawson. All of these guys have the talent and potential to be P4P #1 but right now they're nowhere in the top 10 because they don't have enough names and respect. Well, except for Dawson, he should probably be in the top ten at this point. It's called paying your dues I guess.

Older guys have always been around in Boxing, Archie Moore and Sugar Ray fought well into their 40's for example. I don't know how Hopkins does it, he is obviously in great shape all the time and i don't think he has had any serious disruptive injuries. Fighters will start to lose it from age 32 onwards on average then you have some exceptions like Hopkins and Calzaghe 37 and 43 respectively.
Jones jr, Tarver and Trinidad are shot, Mosley is very close to the end and is not the fighter he once was.
Kostya Tszyu is a perfect example of how injuries take their toll, causing inactivity and eventually age catches up with you when taking on the younger guys. He may well have been ranked number 3 by the Ring but did he deserve to be that high in 2005 after having 1 fight lasting 3 rounds in two years?
DLH looked ordinary against Forbes, has he lost it? Next week will tell us the answer.
Chavez was gone by the mid 90's, Whitaker went quickly and Tszyu who was pushing 36 when he lost to Hatton found out in one fight how quickly it comes to an end for a fighter. All 3 losing to much younger guys before calling it quits. Will DLH go one fight to many?
Mosley was not impressive against Mayorga, a guy he would have destroyed 7-8 years ago, i would hate to see him get knocked out by Margarito.
Forrest is pushing the envelope too!
I have such terrible memories of Ali continuing a career that really should have ended after the Thriller in Manilla!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

Older guys have always been around in Boxing, Archie Moore and Sugar Ray fought well into their 40's for example. I don't know how Hopkins does it, he is obviously in great shape all the time and i don't think he has had any serious disruptive injuries. Fighters will start to lose it from age 32 onwards on average then you have some exceptions like Hopkins and Calzaghe 37 and 43 respectively.
Jones jr, Tarver and Trinidad are shot, Mosley is very close to the end and is not the fighter he once was.
Kostya Tszyu is a perfect example of how injuries take their toll, causing inactivity and eventually age catches up with you when taking on the younger guys. He may well have been ranked number 3 by the Ring but did he deserve to be that high in 2005 after having 1 fight lasting 3 rounds in two years?
DLH looked ordinary against Forbes, has he lost it? Next week will tell us the answer.
Chavez was gone by the mid 90's, Whitaker went quickly and Tszyu who was pushing 36 when he lost to Hatton found out in one fight how quickly it comes to an end for a fighter. All 3 losing to much younger guys before calling it quits. Will DLH go one fight to many?
Mosley was not impressive against Mayorga, a guy he would have destroyed 7-8 years ago, i would hate to see him get knocked out by Margarito.
Forrest is pushing the envelope too!
I have such terrible memories of Ali continuing a career that really should have ended after the Thriller in Manilla!

---

You've just shown the inconsistency from fans/writers i was getting at (what the thread was about). Unless you personally held those concerns for Tszyu before the loss of course?

Kostya was the betting favourite against Hatton. P4P ranked three. And coming off destroying Mitchell.

Yet because of his loss - The impressive three round destruction of Mitchell was non beneficial to him (lack of rounds). The P4P rating was probably not deserved (probably not enough fights in previous two years). And he quickly became "old" in the fight (he lost).

Calzaghe and Hopkins are still at the very top because they have shown no marked signs of deterioration from their younger days.

Jones, Tarver, Trinidad and Mosley have. That's why it's safe to say they are "past their best" and why they're no longer P4P ranked unlike Hopkins and Calzaghe. That's the difference.

If Kostya was not P4P ranked, not the betting favourite and looked terrible beating Mitchell before fighting Hatton. Claiming he was "past his best" would be justified. But that wasn't the case.

So the argument that a still highly regarded losing fighter got "old" is all too convenient ;)

Age in and of itself is not a determining factor, but age correlates to other factors that do determine performance, obviously.

As to whether or not one can say whether a fighter is actually performing at their best, surely that needs to be determined by watching them fight, and not just by a statistic. New info becomes available after a fight that wasn't there before. And I don't think it's out of line to say a fighter's peformance level, particularly endurance, can change from one fight to the next, or over a period of limited activity. As to the exact reason for that change, I suppose that's open to debate.

In boxing it not so much you actual age that determines it, its you ring age. factors like how many rounds youve fought, how many wars youve been in. I also believe that a fighter on the decline can have a second win in his career and have a decent run because of the added experience. For instance George Foreman was past his prime when he regained the title, but he was more experienced and made adjustments.

i think many of the current p4p top 10 could be classed as past their best

however it all dpeneds when they get the big fights or even just recognition, look at calderon for example he is only just breaking into the top ten but i dont think you can argue that his at his best, his recent performances showing his is slowing down and is on the downslide of his career imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

i think many of the current p4p top 10 could be classed as past their best

however it all dpeneds when they get the big fights or even just recognition, look at calderon for example he is only just breaking into the top ten but i dont think you can argue that his at his best, his recent performances showing his is slowing down and is on the downslide of his career imo

---

If that's the case he must have looked incredible in his pomp? Yet he has ONLY just been P4P ranked.

Funny old game ;)

well yes calderon was/is a great fighter, what i mean is look at the first fight with cazares (sp?) he slowed in the second half of the fight and got hit with shots he wouldnt have a few years earlier,

for a 108 lb fighter 33 is very old and its a testement to his skills that he is still going so strong

i really am just stretching out what 'past their best' actually means, for example Hatton will never have another tszyu type performance imo so he can be classed as past his best

Hopkins is the real star of the list though as you could argue that the pavlik fight was his best ever performance and even if not his other great performance (tito) was when he was about 36,37

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

well yes calderon was/is a great fighter, what i mean is look at the first fight with cazares (sp?) he slowed in the second half of the fight and got hit with shots he wouldnt have a few years earlier,

for a 108 lb fighter 33 is very old and its a testement to his skills that he is still going so strong

i really am just stretching out what 'past their best' actually means, for example Hatton will never have another tszyu type performance imo so he can be classed as past his best

Hopkins is the real star of the list though as you could argue that the pavlik fight was his best ever performance and even if not his other great performance (tito) was when he was about 36,37

---

Can't it be Calderon struggled because Cazares is a naturally bigger, tougher fighter than what he was facing before?

At 33 he has more recognition from the boxing world than when he was younger. So was he REALLY that much better?

in the early rounds of the first fight and for pretty much all of the rematch calderon made cazares look silly had no trouble making him miss etc

so why in the first fight did calderon then get tagged and dropped in the later rounds?? could it be that age is simply catching up with him

he is still a very good techincal boxer, possibly the best pure boxer in the world today

however all though he may have not THAT much better in the past but he has been at least slightly better and that would be what i would consider as his BEST which he is now PAST

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

well yes calderon was/is a great fighter, what i mean is look at the first fight with cazares (sp?) he slowed in the second half of the fight and got hit with shots he wouldnt have a few years earlier,

for a 108 lb fighter 33 is very old and its a testement to his skills that he is still going so strong

i really am just stretching out what 'past their best' actually means, for example Hatton will never have another tszyu type performance imo so he can be classed as past his best

Hopkins is the real star of the list though as you could argue that the pavlik fight was his best ever performance and even if not his other great performance (tito) was when he was about 36,37

---

IMO Hopkins ring savvy is what makes those two performances great. But if you look at some of his older fights, I don't think there is any denying that he had better physical tools when he fought guys like Glen Johnson in his early 30s.

yes you are right however i think he was more suited to 160 especially then and maybe that has something to do with it,

his physical peak has passed but his ring savvy lets him pull out these performances at the age he is, he is imo the cleverest man in boxing and it is as much a mental sport as it is physical especially at the top level

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

in the early rounds of the first fight and for pretty much all of the rematch calderon made cazares look silly had no trouble making him miss etc

so why in the first fight did calderon then get tagged and dropped in the later rounds?? could it be that age is simply catching up with him

he is still a very good techincal boxer, possibly the best pure boxer in the world today

however all though he may have not THAT much better in the past but he has been at least slightly better and that would be what i would consider as his BEST which he is now PAST

---

Quote:

---

"he is still a very good techincal boxer, possibly the best pure boxer in the world today"

---

This is the point. If the guy is STILL one of the BEST fighters today, should he LOSE next time, it is completely hypocritical to claim he was "past his best." His "best" shouldn't take credit from the man that betters him. Especially when it's virtually impossible to determine someones "best"

If you're rated as one of the BEST fighters in the world.. excuses shouldn't count ;)

yes i agree you shouldnt take anything away from whoever beats them, but my argument is not that he is not one of the best in the world but he is not at HIS own personal best due to his age

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

yes i agree you shouldnt take anything away from whoever beats them, but my argument is not that he is not one of the best in the world but he is not at HIS own personal best due to his age

---

The problem is people arent conistant with it for example if they like a fighter he was past it when he lost but if they were glad to see him lose it had nothing to do with his prime

example

Nobody gave Berbick any credit for dominating Ali

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hitmanhatton

yes i agree you shouldnt take anything away from whoever beats them, but my argument is not that he is not one of the best in the world but he is not at HIS own personal best due to his age

---

The problem is people arent conistant with it for example if they like a fighter he was past it when he lost but if they were glad to see him lose it had nothing to do with his prime

example

Nobody gave Berbick any credit for dominating Ali

---

but would ali have been in the top 10 p4p at the time ?

i think you have to judge everyone on their last performance

for example you cant treat calzaghes win over jones as if he had beat roy in his prime because it is obvious he was already declining before that however

say if someone was to beat hopkins now age shouldnt be considered the reason after the way he dominated pavlik

Most Fighters know when they have lost it, they know. Its that period when they try and convince themselves they havent is trying to work around it thats the difficult bit. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Does AGE determine whether or not a fighter is "past his best?"

Age of the current Ring P4P 10
1. Pacquiao (29) 2 weeks from 30
2. Marquez (35)
3. Calzaghe (36)
4. Hopkins (43)
5. Vazquez (30)
6. Margarito (30)
7. RMarquez (33)
8. Cotto (27)
9. Calderon (33)
10. Hatton (30)

---

Age really is just a number.

What most of these guys are bringing to the ring, what is making them the "best", is not JUST physical skills. Everyone of them has a level of experience that the "younger" fighters just don't have yet. It's what led Hopkins to take Hatton. (And props to Hatton, btw, for taking what Mayweather Sr had to teach him to heart. He learned a lot in a short amount of time and put a lot of it into practice, it just wasn't enough... )

But where Ricky was still learning his new mindset, Bernard has been there and back again - he was more comfortable in and able to adjust to Ricky's adjustments much more quickly. We see the same thing with the other fighters. Their bodies may be a little slower than they used to be in some cases, but their reflexes have become more ingrained, more instinctual, allowing them a little more time to think & react to their oponents.

They've "been there, done that", instead of just practicing it in training camp. So while they may be physically aging, they're still able to compensate and adapt. It's not until they lose that ability that they're "past their primes". And that's a mindset, not a number on a driver license.

In the case of Tszyu, he was past his prime and best when he fought Hatton.
We all got excited with his return against Mitchell, but he was inactive for 2 years with a shoulder injury prior to that fight and then to confront the young gun Hatton pushing age 36 was simply to much for him. No shame in losing to Hatton either.
He looked awful at the weigh in (drawn and gaunt) i knew then he would lose.
Age and inactivity will get boxers in the end as it does all sportsmen.
Do we say Berbick was better than Ali? Marciano better than Louis? or Camacho better than Leonard?
I doubt there would be anyone on this forum who would argue in the affirmative.
Mosley got past Mayorga in the finish but 7-8 years ago he would have finished him in less than 5 rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

In the case of Tszyu, he was past his prime and best when he fought Hatton.
We all got excited with his return against Mitchell, but he was inactive for 2 years with a shoulder injury prior to that fight and then to confront the young gun Hatton pushing age 36 was simply to much for him. No shame in losing to Hatton either.
He looked awful at the weigh in (drawn and gaunt) i knew then he would lose.
Age and inactivity will get boxers in the end as it does all sportsmen.
Do we say Berbick was better than Ali? Marciano better than Louis? or Camacho better than Leonard?
I doubt there would be anyone on this forum who would argue in the affirmative.
Mosley got past Mayorga in the finish but 7-8 years ago he would have finished him in less than 5 rounds.

---

You really didn't know he would lose. I watched Ricky from his 3rd pro fight onwards and I still was 100% he would get knocked out. It was the fight of his life, his career defining fight and he walked through Kostya's shots and showed more balls than anyone else could have. No one else at 140 now or then could have done what Ricky did that night. Sometimes a fighter just will not be denied, not ever, it was hattons night, he worked years for that one fight.

Ricky is still unbeaten at 140 and twatted the 'supposed' number 2 of the division with ease. I bet you any money Kostya is proud to have been beaten by a fighter who is still the best 140 out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

In the case of Tszyu, he was past his prime and best when he fought Hatton.
We all got excited with his return against Mitchell, but he was inactive for 2 years with a shoulder injury prior to that fight and then to confront the young gun Hatton pushing age 36 was simply to much for him. No shame in losing to Hatton either.
He looked awful at the weigh in (drawn and gaunt) i knew then he would lose.
Age and inactivity will get boxers in the end as it does all sportsmen.
Do we say Berbick was better than Ali? Marciano better than Louis? or Camacho better than Leonard?
I doubt there would be anyone on this forum who would argue in the affirmative.
Mosley got past Mayorga in the finish but 7-8 years ago he would have finished him in less than 5 rounds.

---

You really didn't know he would lose. I watched Ricky from his 3rd pro fight onwards and I still was 100% he would get knocked out. It was the fight of his life, his career defining fight and he walked through Kostya's shots and showed more balls than anyone else could have. No one else at 140 now or then could have done what Ricky did that night. Sometimes a fighter just will not be denied, not ever, it was hattons night, he worked years for that one fight.

Ricky is still unbeaten at 140 and twatted the 'supposed' number 2 of the division with ease. I bet you any money Kostya is proud to have been beaten by a fighter who is still the best 140 out there.

---

I'm Not disagreeing with you, Hatton was a tall order and i think Tszyu made a big mistake taking him on in his own backyard. I was well aware of how good Hatton was before the fight and gave him a great chance to beat KT, when i saw the weigh in and with just 3 rounds in 2 years i thought you have bitten off more than you can chew here Kostya! Hatton will be regarded as a top 5 all time 140lb champion at the end of his career and that is some effort. I personally rate him 4th best behind Pryor, Tszyu and Chavez. I like the Fatboy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

In the case of Tszyu, he was past his prime and best when he fought Hatton.
We all got excited with his return against Mitchell, but he was inactive for 2 years with a shoulder injury prior to that fight and then to confront the young gun Hatton pushing age 36 was simply to much for him. No shame in losing to Hatton either.
He looked awful at the weigh in (drawn and gaunt) i knew then he would lose.
Age and inactivity will get boxers in the end as it does all sportsmen.
Do we say Berbick was better than Ali? Marciano better than Louis? or Camacho better than Leonard?
I doubt there would be anyone on this forum who would argue in the affirmative.
Mosley got past Mayorga in the finish but 7-8 years ago he would have finished him in less than 5 rounds.

---

Those guys were all considered way past their best. Nobody currently has Mosley P4P - because everyone can see he's past his best.

Tszyu was still ranked P4P the 3rd BEST fighter in the WORLD.

Tszyu was EXPECTED to win by the majority.

What were the EXCUSES made when he lost eight years earlier to Phillips?

(i'm not Kostya bashing.. just he's an easy example to use ;))

you can still be on of the best in the world and be past your own best

for example in a football anology

thierry henry is not quite as quick and prolific as he once was but youd still rather have him in your team than emile heskey !!

as for mosley he was past his best when he fought cotto but pushed him close so cotto deserves credit as mosley was still a very good fighter, his performance against mayorga would suggest he has slipped further than him

in conclusion you dont have to be at YOUR best to be one of the best in the world