Why the hate for big brother?

[powerpuncher]

i am right that there were more boxers back in the 30's and on. i think that you are talking about the 20's and before when boxing was illegal in many states. by the 30's, fights were being held all the time. boxing was huge during that time period. there werent as many big sports as there are now and more people went into boxing because they could and they needed to make some money.

and again, yes boxers learn from older fighters, but that doesnt mean that they are better. with that logic, every passing year the boxers should just get better which isnt happening. i guarantee you that in 50 years, boxers wont be any better than they are now. there may be slight rules changes, but overall, it will come down to skill level, athletic ability, and game plan.

my main problem with your arguments is that you cant really accept an expert opinion or even a primary source. as you said, you cant trust historians, trainers, or fighters opinions. even though these people have been studying the sport for years, you think for some reason that you just know more than them. that they are only talking from a nostalgic point of view and not a realistic one. also, like you said, you cant even trust a fighter when they give a first hand account on an opponent. you think that they are lying about their perspective. thats like me saying that atoms dont exist. i may have learned about them a little bit and have seen pictures, but those scientists are just nostalgic and it doesnt really make sense to me so i just wont believe them. although all science is theory technically, all the evidence points out that its true. same in this case of boxing. although there is a small chance you could be right, all the evidence points that joe louis would KO haye easily.

[Max Power]

But just as wirth your atom analogy, it can be shown that what the fighters said was false by statistics and film. Take Shavers and Holmes. Tyson KO'd him, Holmes got up from Shaver's. The Tyson KD looked brutal and powerful. I didn't see the Shavers one that impressive.

Sorry but if someone is unconciuos it stands to reason it was harder! I could get knocked out and claim a different punch was harder that only wobbled me but that's not being honest.

I just prefer to trust my own judgement.

[Mr140]

Well boxing historians are pretty biased to older fighters and the old writers as well. Boxing hared sport not to be biased in why think we have so many different decision at times everyone sees something different or like something different. Not saying they don't know what there talking about but older guys do have a biased toward the fighters of there generation which is fine because a lot of people are. Do you honestly think Louis or Rocky would stand a chance against the brothers i sure don't but they were good for there era but there eras were weaker then now. Also when people bring up some of the giants they fought lets be real they not even close to brother they were freaks shows really. This era not that great but i think they were eras just as weak if not worst if we go through all the years in boxing.