How to shake free of Old School bias.
...if we compare either the fight itself or each of the two men [PBF and De La Hoya] involved with the glory days of pugilist masters like Ray Robinson and the almost unbelievable fights he had, we are going way too far with the hype… Look at the facts, Robinson had over two
hundred fights as a pro - over twice as many as both Oscar and Floyd combined. And Ray was never once legitimately KO’d. Fighters were just tougher back in Robbie’s day. It’s that simple
--James Slater
I believe, in my prime, I could have fought with anybody alive.
--Rocky Marciano
Let’s use Rocky as the subject example, though any number of other great old school fighters could be used.
Gosh I loved Rocky Marciano for any number of reasons not the least of which is that he was from my era and my generation. He was pure old school and so am I—but not to the point of naivety. Now some fighters just plain entered the ring with bad intentions; their very appearance evoking fear. The Rock was one of them. He took away his opponent’s heart and soul little by little, piece by piece. Like Joe Frazier (and like what someone else recently called him), the Rock was a "truth telling machine." That he was an Italian didn’t hurt much either. I also thought his skills were greatly underestimated. He was savvy fighter who did what he had to do against everyone they put in from of him. After all, 49-0 is a perfect record.
Nostalgia
Sure, looking through the prism of nostalgia makes everything seem better and I like to play out old school memories just like other old timers. However, and this is the rub, I also try to be thoughtful and objective when making comparisons between the past and the present–and that’s where the issue of old school prejudice comes in (some call it "era" or "generational" prejudice). That’s why comparisons between The Rock and modern fighters are a tricky endeavor.
Comparisons
Should Marciano be compared to more recent heavyweights in the mold of Ali, George Foreman, Larry Holmes, Lennox Lewis, or Wladimir Klitschko? Maybe even a prime Riddick Bowe? In my opinion, the answer is manifestly no. He simply was not big enough, though he likely would have beaten his fair share of big fighters. Instead of comparing him against fighters who stood 6"--9" taller and outweighed him by 40-70 pounds, how about comparing him to cruiserweights on a relative basis? After all, Rocky fought at a disciplined 183-188 for the most part which places him in the middle of the cruiserweight limit. In fact, many of today’s cruiserweights would outweigh the Brockton Blockbuster since the original top limit was raised from 190 lbs to 200 lbs in 2003.
Thus, looking back, how would he have done against guys like Marvin Camel, Lee Roy Murphy, Carlos Deleon, Dwight Braxton, Michael Moorer, Ralf Rocchigiani, Bobby Czyz, Orlin Norris, Fabrice Tiozzo, Johnny Nelson, Ricky Parkey, Vassily Jirov, Virgil Hill, and James Toney? Perhaps the best matches would have been against Evander Holyfield (when he was a cruiserweight champion) and a prime Dariuz Michalczewski.
More recently, how would he compare to the following who fight (or fought) at Cruiserweight (175-200 lb (90.72 kg)? Tomasz Adamek, David Haye, Firat Arsian, Vadim Tokarev, Jean Marc Mormeck, Marco Huck, Denis Ledbedev, Steve Cunningham, Zsolt Erdei, Alexander Frenkel, Krzysztof Wlodarczyk, Johnathon Banks, Ola Alafoabi, BJ Flores, Valery Brudov, Wayne Braithwaite, Guillermo Jones, Giacobbe Fragomeni...
Variables
Yes, he did starch Archie Moore when both weighed 188. And he did beat his share of guys over 200 pounds, including Don Cockell, Lee Savold, Joe Louis, Bill Wilson, James Patrick Connolly, and Humphrey Jackson. The fact is, however, Rocky was a small heavyweight, and when I compare him to the top cruiserweights, I am comparing apples to apples except for the difference in era.
The task is to engage facts before nostalgia. The lesson is to take into account all essential variables when making comparisons between old and modern. Variable such as number of fights, era (for example, the 70‘s were a great time for heavyweights and the 80‘s for mid-weights), stamina, training techniques and methodology, records, style, chin, KO percentages, skill-sets, entire body of work, quality of opposition, management, punch output, etc. When this is done, myth is stripped away from facts. When this is done, you are not engaging in old school or generational prejudice bias.
Of course, I must confess that when I do this; Rocky Marciano quickly becomes the greatest cruiserweight in history.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Rocky was the greatest Cruiserweight champion so you have shaken the old school bias by admitting that. Others have him as the greatest heavy ever, which is wrong.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Rocky was the greatest Cruiserweight champion so you have shaken the old school bias by admitting that. Others have him as the greatest heavy ever, which is wrong.
I still rate him as a heavyweight because the guys he fought were the heavyweights of his era and he could only fight the guys of his era. His record (as a heavyweight) stands out, untarnished by any losses. He had a weak era and he dealt with it the way a great champion would, he never lost.
However if I was matching Rocky in any hypothetical matches guys from 175 to cruiserweight are the best matches for him just given his size. Same goes for Jack Dempsey who weighed around 195ish. Also Jack Johnson weighed pretty light at 200-210. Joe Louis weighed in at around 210-215 as did the young Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali. In their primes Tyson and Holyfield never tipped the scales too terribly heavy either.
I think Rocky would have whipped the crap out of Tomaz Adamek...wouldn't that have been a hell of a brawl?
Shit now you have me thinking Rocky vs:
Hopkins
James Toney
Antonio Tarver
Montell Griffin
BERT COOPER
....man those would have been some great style match ups
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
I've always rated Rocky as a (modern) Cruiserweight ;)
Jack Johnson could of probably made Light Heavyweight (although that's only if the science of making weight was ever a requirement for him).
That's why I'm happy (or maybe 'not so reluctant' would be a better turn of phrase...) to give credence to the likes of the K-Bros when talking about their historical standing in the Heavyweight division.
Simply because, I accept that the playing field has and will always change... In a number of ways.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Thinks its just ingrained in eras. We all love to believe that the ones we came up with stand above the ones prior and the ones we watch today. Familiarity...nostalgia....seeing a fighter who is infact 'complete' and therefore more easily judged and evaluated. Fans tend to live in the 'now' and its all about perspective. The weight ranges and classifications are just verbiage. You say heavyweight division and it draws visuals and historic relevance. You say 190 lbs today and you think cruiser weight so some have a hard time giving them a realistic chance vs guys today based strictly on size. Though you cannot dismiss the intangiables of fighters gone by...activity, skill and frankly grit...sort of goes hand in hand with generations too. People were 'harder' and thats just a fact compared to some pampered divas we have wearing gloves today. I give Marcianos power a chance vs many but giving weight he would not meet heavys in the ring. Rocky as an active cruiser would be on par with Holyfield giving that division life and be a nightmare for anyone. You have to play the hand your dealt. Bit of a ramble,ahh well.
Shit...while were here. Holyfield vs Marciano anyone,cruiser ? I like Holyfield ;D
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Holmcall, Have you read the Arc of Boxing by Mike Silver? I haven't, but I read a review and it seems like it would be up your alley.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Thinks its just ingrained in eras. We all love to believe that the ones we came up with stand above the ones prior and the ones we watch today. Familiarity...nostalgia....seeing a fighter who is infact 'complete' and therefore more easily judged and evaluated. Fans tend to live in the 'now' and its all about perspective. The weight ranges and classifications are just verbiage. You say heavyweight division and it draws visuals and historic relevance. You say 190 lbs today and you think cruiser weight so some have a hard time giving them a realistic chance vs guys today based strictly on size. Though you cannot dismiss the intangiables of fighters gone by...activity, skill and frankly grit...sort of goes hand in hand with generations too. People were 'harder' and thats just a fact compared to some pampered divas we have wearing gloves today. I give Marcianos power a chance vs many but giving weight he would not meet heavys in the ring. Rocky as an active cruiser would be on par with Holyfield giving that division life and be a nightmare for anyone. You have to play the hand your dealt. Bit of a ramble,ahh well.
Shit...while were here. Holyfield vs Marciano anyone,cruiser ? I like Holyfield ;D
I go with Rocky at that weight.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Thinks its just ingrained in eras. We all love to believe that the ones we came up with stand above the ones prior and the ones we watch today. Familiarity...nostalgia....seeing a fighter who is infact 'complete' and therefore more easily judged and evaluated. Fans tend to live in the 'now' and its all about perspective. The weight ranges and classifications are just verbiage. You say heavyweight division and it draws visuals and historic relevance. You say 190 lbs today and you think cruiser weight so some have a hard time giving them a realistic chance vs guys today based strictly on size. Though you cannot dismiss the intangiables of fighters gone by...activity, skill and frankly grit...sort of goes hand in hand with generations too. People were 'harder' and thats just a fact compared to some pampered divas we have wearing gloves today. I give Marcianos power a chance vs many but giving weight he would not meet heavys in the ring. Rocky as an active cruiser would be on par with Holyfield giving that division life and be a nightmare for anyone. You have to play the hand your dealt. Bit of a ramble,ahh well.
Shit...while were here. Holyfield vs Marciano anyone,cruiser ? I like Holyfield ;D
I go with Rocky at that weight.
Ya know. Given where they were at respected points in overall career development...I could see that if he goes free swinging with Rocky. Lean towards handspeed-combos carrying it though. Would have been great.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
I think if these modern fighters went back in time Rocky would wear them all down over those long last rounds. If he came forward in time he would be disqualified for hitting with the side of the glove too often.
Tough mindedness and hard times would weigh against easier times and better food and more technical training. Some fighters are hungry for fame and a name these days but rarely would they have grown up with real hunger and having to work from the ground up. No chainsaws back then, men did 12 hours in the field or on roads then went to train in the ring later. I'll go with the old.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
I think people who say the guys of old are invincible are truly lost in nostalgia. I mean even the greatest ever Sugar Ray Robinson watch this fight with Lamotta.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUYhjX64pDo
You see brilliance in offense and his quick jab, but you also see flaws defensively. You see how his jab often falls short despite its speed, how off balance he was coming forward when he would throw those amazing combinations, if a guy were to use lateral movement who knows what would have happened. Technically we have seen the sport improve so much, but it's almost impossible to find his offensive poetry beyond Pacquiao at times, and what RJJ, Meldrick Taylor, young Mosley, Hearns and SRL did in spurts. You see Robinson look impressive, but you see him fail to capitalize on the fact that Lamotta is hunched over to his right, and Ray is often throwing his jab short despite the fact Lamotta is so slow.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Different weights you are talking about, different deal in my mind too.
Heavyweights are not as technical as other weights and they get worse the longer the fight goes on, (generally)speaking.
There are some modern exceptions that would have a shot like some of the talented giants we have seen but we are talking generally/overall here.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Andre
I think if these modern fighters went back in time Rocky would wear them all down over those long last rounds. If he came forward in time he would be disqualified for hitting with the side of the glove too often.
Tough mindedness and hard times would weigh against easier times and better food and more technical training. Some fighters are hungry for fame and a name these days but rarely would they have grown up with real hunger and having to work from the ground up. No chainsaws back then, men did 12 hours in the field or on roads then went to train in the ring later. I'll go with the old.
I'm sure a lot of the guys Mayweather fought at the point they did were more desparate than he was, but look how foolish he made them look, or RJJ was a better example of that. The truth is that heart only goes so far against superior athleticism coupled with extensive elite experience and amazing technical soundness.
IMO there is no way Marciano would have beaten either Klitschko brother, a healthy Holyfield, Lennox Lewis.
truly look how slow he was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqM_X01BnfA. SUre he had good power and amazing determination, but how would a guy that slow ever reach a guy like Wladimir or Vitali or Lewis? How would he be able to beat a guy like Holyfield who is bigger, faster, stronger, and has just as much heart and stamina? Or a guy like David Tua? Or Ike Ibeabuchi? He was just truly blessed to be at the right place at the right time in the greatest sense of it. Ali or Holmes would have also picked him apart, and either version of Foreman would have knocked him out. So would have Liston.
Here is the one guy of the past who I think transcends any timeperiod in boxing, and IMO is better than Ray Robinson, its just too bad he got in a plane crash
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a_wt60Wn9M
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Yeah theres a few exceptions for sure. I wouldnt give him much hope against many of those that you've mentioned in the middle rounds he was a small heavy. I dont rate him either, I think he cheated with alot of his shots being off the padded area of the glove too.
Wore men down.
Generally again, I dont know how many modern fighters could continue into 15 rounds with some of the men of old either. Most look good when they are getting everything their own way but they fold much faster these days when they dont, I dont think they have as much grit put it that way.
Its a varied thing on too many levels, size, technique, rounds even the latest in footwear would have most modern fighters moving, gripping and hitting harder.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Rocky was the greatest Cruiserweight champion so you have shaken the old school bias by admitting that. Others have him as the greatest heavy ever, which is wrong.
Exactly!
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
0james0
Interestingly, in contrast to your wealth of first hand experience of being of that era, my era is still ongoing. Right now, today.
I'm not young by any means, Freya and kids prove that. But certainly not old enough to really know Rocky and co.
Yes I've watched videos, yes I've seen the records. But for me I'll never honestly know how good these guys were and I wonder how many of my generation and moving forward the next generation will remember these guys as legends, but possibly over hyped ones?
Well youtube and videos help, but I think it's important to remember a fight in the context in which it was held to get the full appreciation. Being 73 gives me a bit of an edge, but youtube has begun to level the playing field.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Holmcall, Have you read the Arc of Boxing by Mike Silver? I haven't, but I read a review and it seems like it would be up your alley.
Yes indeed. I know Mike very well and he was the guest speaker at the annual Ring 4 Veteran Boxers Banquet in Boston (of which I am amember) and I had the honor of sitting at the dais with him and next to Micky Ward--a real stroke oif luck--that.
I was going to review it for the site I write on, but then I saw that too many others have already reviewd it. I would have given it a glowing review although I am not nearly as Old School as Mike. But he did his research and that's what counts big for me.
He also is a nice chap.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
I think people who say the guys of old are invincible are truly lost in nostalgia. I mean even the greatest ever Sugar Ray Robinson watch this fight with Lamotta.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUYhjX64pDo
You see brilliance in offense and his quick jab, but you also see flaws defensively. You see how his jab often falls short despite its speed, how off balance he was coming forward when he would throw those amazing combinations, if a guy were to use lateral movement who knows what would have happened. Technically we have seen the sport improve so much, but it's almost impossible to find his offensive poetry beyond Pacquiao at times, and what RJJ, Meldrick Taylor, young Mosley, Hearns and SRL did in spurts. You see Robinson look impressive, but you see him fail to capitalize on the fact that Lamotta is hunched over to his right, and Ray is often throwing his jab short despite the fact Lamotta is so slow.
Yes. I agree
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Andre
Yeah theres a few exceptions for sure. I wouldnt give him much hope against many of those that you've mentioned in the middle rounds he was a small heavy. I dont rate him either, I think he cheated with alot of his shots being off the padded area of the glove too.
Wore men down.
Generally again, I dont know how many modern fighters could continue into 15 rounds with some of the men of old either. Most look good when they are getting everything their own way but they fold much faster these days when they dont, I dont think they have as much grit put it that way.
Its a varied thing on too many levels, size, technique, rounds even the latest in footwear would have most modern fighters moving, gripping and hitting harder.
Grit. Indeed. ;D
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Gee, It's kind of nice being back on Saddo.
;D
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
holmcall
Quote:
Originally Posted by
0james0
Interestingly, in contrast to your wealth of first hand experience of being of that era, my era is still ongoing. Right now, today.
I'm not young by any means, Freya and kids prove that. But certainly not old enough to really know Rocky and co.
Yes I've watched videos, yes I've seen the records. But for me I'll never honestly know how good these guys were and I wonder how many of my generation and moving forward the next generation will remember these guys as legends, but possibly over hyped ones?
Well youtube and videos help, but I think it's important to remember a fight in the context in which it was held to get the full appreciation. Being 73 gives me a bit of an edge, but youtube has begun to level the playing field.
73? Wow, that's pretty impressive. You lived through an era when baseball and boxing were the no. 1 and 2 sports in America. Well baseball has only slipped to the no. 2 sport while boxing is almost dead from the general US public.
Re: How to shake free of Old School bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
holmcall
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Holmcall, Have you read the Arc of Boxing by Mike Silver? I haven't, but I read a review and it seems like it would be up your alley.
Yes indeed. I know Mike very well and he was the guest speaker at the annual Ring 4 Veteran Boxers Banquet in Boston (of which I am amember) and I had the honor of sitting at the dais with him and next to Micky Ward--a real stroke oif luck--that.
I was going to review it for the site I write on, but then I saw that too many others have already reviewd it. I would have given it a glowing review although I am not nearly as Old School as Mike. But he did his research and that's what counts big for me.
He also is a nice chap.
I have now done areview on Mike's book and it is on-line on another site.
