Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Array
Array
Array
Oh for sure, I give big respect to the pioneers like Leonard who paved boxing's long highway and made it possible for guys like Whitaker, PBF, Roy Jones, ect to exist!
But we're talking WAY back in the day when boxing was still evolving, people were figuring out what worked and what didn't. Back when sport science was basically non existent and nutrition and training wasn't nearly as advanced as it is in modern times. Guys are bigger, stronger, faster and technique grew a great deal since.
So when people say stuff like Benny Leonard would kill Whitaker or Mosley... it's just unrealistic. If you had a time machine to go bring him (at his prime) to Pernell's time and have them fight, he wouldn't know what to make of Pernell (or Mosley).
Great for their time, but if you want to talk modern day, you can't compare a guy like that.
Array
Beanflicker your bias for new fighters makes sense in the heavyweight division but not for the lighter weight fighters. They were tough, skilled and seasoned campaigners who could easily have wiped the floor with many fighters today.
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
I'm not saying they weren't tough, seasoned or skilled. I'm just saying that skills have evolved since then, and they are, in general, athletically inferior to athletes of 50 years later.
They are great because they were pioneers... I guess to use another analogy, take Jimi Hendrix. Widely lauded as the greatest guitarist of all time.... but since he died 40 years ago or so, guitarists have largely eclipsed the level of technical proficiency he had. Jimi was an awesome guitarist back in the day, no doubt the best at the time, but if you put him in a time machine and brought him to the present, his guitar skills wouldn't be anything special because there are literally 15 year old kids messing around in their rooms that have the guitar skill he has. Now without Jimi, they probably wouldn't even be playing guitar. And of course he deserves to be known as one of the greats because he was a true pioneer. But if you're talking head to head, no, because things improve with time.
Also, I always found it weird that guys could say, with the same confidence that they would recite their birth date, that a guy like Leonard who they never actually saw fight, have no idea who 99% of his opponents were or if they were worth a shit, would whip a guy like Pernell who's brilliance we have all seen with our eyes. I saw one of Leonard's fights on youtube, and I gotta say I wasn't wowed by the guy. It probably was past his prime, but I didn't see anything that would give Pernell problems.
Think about it, if we could predict the outcome of a fight based on numbers and accomplishments, we'd all be multi-millionaires. You don't get to take a nice looking record or accolades with you into the ring. It's man vs man, ability vs ability.
Array
I get where your coming from to a degree. Living it and seeing it is believing and like every aspect of day to day, we evolve, times change, we learn the value of thumbs etc. I def don't think he or anyone one would go killing today's fighters but likewise Leonard wouldn't be like some Neanderthal seeing a burning bush for the first time. He always struck me as ahead of his time and certainly wasn't a clubbing oof. The guy could box and very well. Unlike a Greb where we can only speculate, we're fortunate to have footage however "old". Looking past the grain and black & white its as clear as day. Its one lifetime ago not a complete relic found in ice. Its touchable. Science, nutrition, rules, boxing politricks etc have certainly changed. More so when talking Whitaker, Holyfield camp. under water weight resistance training ffs?! Training habits as well but where guys work in a gym or swat training pads much more today, fighters simply fought fights then. Something to be said for the constant activity level then. They'd look at those giant pillows and a 10-12 round cap among other things and scoff. As advanced as we fancy ourselves and as far as they've come it's still the hurt business and even the slickest have a ill caveman at the core. It's what pulled Whitaker out of the fire once or twice himself. Today's fighters and the ever growing number of spoon fed divas could learn ALOT from fighters of old. In the ring as well as outside of it.
Yeah, it'll always be hard to compare because they are just completely different worlds.
I do think that the fact that old timer's fought more often gets overblown in terms of importance. While I do agree that it gave guys more experience to perfect their craft... in terms of quality of opponents, these HUGE resumes are padded with stiffs, complete throwaway fights. Ray Robinson won 173 fights, which is a crazy number for sure, but how many of those 173 fights were top-quality opponents? I'd go out on a limb and say it's a very small fraction. Guys had to fight 200 times because they had to, not because they were brave he-men who wanted to. If SRR or Benny Leonard could have made a couple million for one fight, they'd only fight once or twice a year too.
Array
Modern guys fight 35 times in a career and they fight hardly any quality opponents. You figure that the first 18-20 are set-ups to pad the record, then you fight 'quality opponents' that try for 2 rounds, then you fights contenders that are half your size, then fight 'champions' that have been brought along the same way.
So even when you fight another "champion" you're fighting another guy that has never been in a fight in his life.
And you would be WAY out on a limb re: Robinson's record.
Array
Thats the great thing today, we have the records to scrutinize much easier because we lived it, live action. I can look at a record from another era and relate only to whats been observed by others and the few we are fortunate to see but we're still seeing it after the fact and in a broken random order. Rambling here man. Long day.
I think the records and numbers can all be very similiar for the most part, kept in perspective with amount fought. All fighters, ALL, have had there fill of cannon fodder and some have more padding than a High School Prom. I mean Leonard though massivly active like many then had the same pace as alot of big names today in regards to a major title. Mosley, Jones jr, Mayweather etc. Almost four, four and a half yrs and they faced some clay pigeons too. Mosley had more cans than a recycling center before his trinket. Today watching a young groomed superstars knock over some guys with the skill of a crash test dummy can be hard to stomach. Guys had to fight very true but it evened out with those considered 'great' over time. Its in large part a generational thing.
Array
That is cool. The top 5 lightweights in history is perhaps the toughest list to make in boxing.
This is what Durans trainer Ray Arcel had to say about Leonard and its paraphrased by a boxing writer.
The great trainer Ray Arcel once said that the two best fighters he ever saw were Benny Leonard and Ray Robinson and hesitated on picking between them. Of Leonard he said, “His mental energy surpassed that of anyone else.” Indeed “The Ghetto Wizard” was a clever tactician and ring strategist with a brilliant mind who believed and taught that boxing was the art of out thinking one’s opponent. At this few were Benny Leonard’s equal. Leonard was a master boxer who possessed superb defensive footwork, speed, and elusiveness. He was superb at feinting and counter-punching as well as being a great combination puncher. In many ways Benny was the Muhammad Ali of the lightweight division as he defeated the greatest array of challengers in lightweight division history including Freddie Welsh, Willie Ritchie, Johnny Dundee, Ritchie Mitchell, Charley White, Lew Tendler, and Rocky Kansas.
you know who we forgot? JMM. I can't believe I left out Marquez.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks