Max powerism 101:

[Andre]

I can see your point,modern fighters do have it better in so many ways. In general over all the weights I think the fighters of old were more mentally tough from the work during the times and were more determined grittier fighters that could go for some amazing number of rounds.Most fights were for around an hour but varied from 20 minutes up to 3 and half hours. One bare fisted boxing match went for 3 hours 16 miniutes after which one fighter Simon Byrne died 3 days later (Byrne had also killed a man in the ring prior to his last fight.)
Theres the difference; skills correct diets advanced techniques lesser rounds and gloves.
Cant compare the two really and then there s the guys who fell into the game in between the two extremes some had some of the old grit in them some more of the newer stuff some a touch of both hard to draw a distinct line in the sand though. 20 rounds,15,12,10. You take one fighter from here to there or one from there to here and each may not do so well in the others eras.

On the number or rounds fought in previous times Andre....

With respect to the HW division which has been getting increasingly heavier, RING STAMINA is related not just to cardio efficiency, but also total expenditure of energy during a bout. What I mean is ANY boxer can fight for ANY number of rounds, energy wise, so long as they fight at an appropriate pace for their condition and their size!

The size of the boxer plays an even more important role than the conditioning especially when in the form of muscle mass because they consume so much oxygen.

Basically, slower pace OR lesser rounds is a product of stronger boxers.

There is another important point.

Past time boxers that fought many rounds, the punch was bareable! It's obvious that 2 powerful modern boxers would never be able to fight hard for that long anyway because one would be knocked out long before the end.

MAX POWERISM 101:

12-15-20 Rounds of boxing or whatever.. Is a sign of FAILURE! Failure to win by KO! No boxer WANTS to fight for so long. No boxer PLANS to fight for so long (unless your Chris Byrd). Going the to the cards is a sign that whatever tactics and strategy you had implemented to beat your opponent did not work out optimally the way you wanted. Maybe not necessarily because you YOURSELF were bad, but because maybe your opponent was too good.

Anyway, considering longer round fights from previous times against current 12 round boxers penalises modern fighters in another way too. PREVIOUS boxers had 3 or more extra rounds up there sleeve in order to score a KO! If modern boxers were ALLOWED to continue boxing past 12 when they reached it, there would be more KO's scored and KO ratio's would be even higher today!

A generalization with the weakness and ko thing.There were 60 to 100 round fights at times past short two minute rounds. There were plenty of ko's and short fights back then because you cant train a loose chin and ther foot work was nothing like those of later days. There were more fights in towns than were charted down you only get to read about the famous ones. Realistically if you whipped one modern fighter back in time most of the boys who fight today would be bawling about lack of rules, not brawling for their life as you had to do to survive. Plenty of people fighting these days with a weakness they can hide behind because of the rules, gloves,better techniques, better refs. Many are here now with such size and reach they can and do spend the rounds moving around behind their jab, these types you could call smarter or one dimensional compared with some others from the near past too. Just as some from the near past are one dimension compared with some freakish skilled fighters of today. Everything works both ways you cant generalise when theres such vast difference in rules. Those old bare fisters would grab an outstretched arm and roll their body weight around the outside of it throwing the opponent into the ropes,tread on feet, the elbow would always follow the missed punch in close,thumb in eye,head butts you name it,no stopping for little cuts back then.Fuck me Harry the windmill fought blind in one eye for years. The modern boys wouldnt be anywhere near a ring in the same situation.They were not weak cunts mate, they would wield an axe ,a pick or a sledge hammer all day and then train half the night.

[Max Power]

I can see your point,modern fighters do have it better in so many ways. In general over all the weights I think the fighters of old were more mentally tough from the work during the times and were more determined grittier fighters that could go for some amazing number of rounds.Most fights were for around an hour but varied from 20 minutes up to 3 and half hours. One bare fisted boxing match went for 3 hours 16 miniutes after which one fighter Simon Byrne died 3 days later (Byrne had also killed a man in the ring prior to his last fight.)
Theres the difference; skills correct diets advanced techniques lesser rounds and gloves.
Cant compare the two really and then there s the guys who fell into the game in between the two extremes some had some of the old grit in them some more of the newer stuff some a touch of both hard to draw a distinct line in the sand though. 20 rounds,15,12,10. You take one fighter from here to there or one from there to here and each may not do so well in the others eras.

On the number or rounds fought in previous times Andre....

With respect to the HW division which has been getting increasingly heavier, RING STAMINA is related not just to cardio efficiency, but also total expenditure of energy during a bout. What I mean is ANY boxer can fight for ANY number of rounds, energy wise, so long as they fight at an appropriate pace for their condition and their size!

The size of the boxer plays an even more important role than the conditioning especially when in the form of muscle mass because they consume so much oxygen.

Basically, slower pace OR lesser rounds is a product of stronger boxers.

There is another important point.

Past time boxers that fought many rounds, the punch was bareable! It's obvious that 2 powerful modern boxers would never be able to fight hard for that long anyway because one would be knocked out long before the end.

MAX POWERISM 101:

12-15-20 Rounds of boxing or whatever.. Is a sign of FAILURE! Failure to win by KO! No boxer WANTS to fight for so long. No boxer PLANS to fight for so long (unless your Chris Byrd). Going the to the cards is a sign that whatever tactics and strategy you had implemented to beat your opponent did not work out optimally the way you wanted. Maybe not necessarily because you YOURSELF were bad, but because maybe your opponent was too good.

Anyway, considering longer round fights from previous times against current 12 round boxers penalises modern fighters in another way too. PREVIOUS boxers had 3 or more extra rounds up there sleeve in order to score a KO! If modern boxers were ALLOWED to continue boxing past 12 when they reached it, there would be more KO's scored and KO ratio's would be even higher today!

A generalization with the weakness and ko thing.There were 60 to 100 round fights at times past short two minute rounds. There were plenty of ko's and short fights back then because you cant train a loose chin and ther foot work was nothing like those of later days. There were more fights in towns than were charted down you only get to read about the famous ones. Realistically if you whipped one modern fighter back in time most of the boys who fight today would be bawling about lack of rules, not brawling for their life as you had to do to survive. Plenty of people fighting these days with a weakness they can hide behind because of the rules, gloves,better techniques, better refs. Many are here now with such size and reach they can and do spend the rounds moving around behind their jab, these types you could call smarter or one dimensional compared with some others from the near past too. Just as some from the near past are one dimension compared with some freakish skilled fighters of today. Everything works both ways you cant generalise when theres such vast difference in rules. Those old bare fisters would grab an outstretched arm and roll their body weight around the outside of it throwing the opponent into the ropes,tread on feet, the elbow would always follow the missed punch in close,thumb in eye,head butts you name it,no stopping for little cuts back then.Fuck me Harry the windmill fought blind in one eye for years. The modern boys wouldnt be anywhere near a ring in the same situation.They were not weak cunts mate, they would wield an axe ,a pick or a sledge hammer all day and then train half the night.

Yes the rules have evolved/changed, which blurs the distinguishment of what it means to even be a "boxer" let alone just a "HW".

I find it amusing sometimes today when modern fans complain about Wladimir's or even somewhat nostalgic fans about Ali's "holding" when back in the very old days, wrestling was BUILT into boxing.

I personally, Andre, think that the modern fighters could better adapt to an older system though, whereas a more ancient fighter, no matter how hard he tried, would simply be knocked out anyway.

Now we're moving into my subjective opinion though so I guess yours is equally valid here.

One further thing you have to consider though, is that in the past, where fights went for more rounds, you MUST consider how many fights, as you have alluded to, ACTUALLY WENT that many rounds!

I will consider 13 rounds+ to capture all previous eras...

- Of the approximately 70,000 fights across all eras, only 1,600, 2%! went 13+ rounds! They are extremely rare in the history of HW boxing!

- Of the 80 or so HW champs, only HALF of them even HAD such a long fight at all!

- Such fights always involved not only weaker punches but also a lot of missed punches and a lot of clinching.

- Most of the champs that DID have these longer fights only had 1 or 2 of them.

The 5 HW champs in history who had the MOST over-long fights were,

Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, Muhammad Ali, Marvin Hart, Tommy Burns...

All of them cruisers, light heavies or even middleweights by todays standards. And all of them featherfists by even the THEN standards!

There punches were weaker than todays punches and their opponents were weaker too!

I personally feel that nostalgists who claim "past boxers fought more rounds, had better ring stamina" are converting failures, or lacking qualities into virtues to protect legacies. Boxing is not a marathon to me, who can last the longest, for me it's who can either knock their opponent out or win the most number of rounds within the specified limit.

But the REAL clincher is this, when considering MODERN HW (200+), there have only been 31! fights in boxing history that have gone more than 12 rounds! 31 in history! Of which total featherfists Johnson and Ali are responsible for 15 of these failures alone!

And 215+ overlong fights (about the weight of a cruiser on fight night or roughly the smallest HW today) only 12 times in history!

[Andre]

I can see your point,modern fighters do have it better in so many ways. In general over all the weights I think the fighters of old were more mentally tough from the work during the times and were more determined grittier fighters that could go for some amazing number of rounds.Most fights were for around an hour but varied from 20 minutes up to 3 and half hours. One bare fisted boxing match went for 3 hours 16 miniutes after which one fighter Simon Byrne died 3 days later (Byrne had also killed a man in the ring prior to his last fight.)
Theres the difference; skills correct diets advanced techniques lesser rounds and gloves.
Cant compare the two really and then there s the guys who fell into the game in between the two extremes some had some of the old grit in them some more of the newer stuff some a touch of both hard to draw a distinct line in the sand though. 20 rounds,15,12,10. You take one fighter from here to there or one from there to here and each may not do so well in the others eras.

On the number or rounds fought in previous times Andre....

With respect to the HW division which has been getting increasingly heavier, RING STAMINA is related not just to cardio efficiency, but also total expenditure of energy during a bout. What I mean is ANY boxer can fight for ANY number of rounds, energy wise, so long as they fight at an appropriate pace for their condition and their size!

The size of the boxer plays an even more important role than the conditioning especially when in the form of muscle mass because they consume so much oxygen.

Basically, slower pace OR lesser rounds is a product of stronger boxers.

There is another important point.

Past time boxers that fought many rounds, the punch was bareable! It's obvious that 2 powerful modern boxers would never be able to fight hard for that long anyway because one would be knocked out long before the end.

MAX POWERISM 101:

12-15-20 Rounds of boxing or whatever.. Is a sign of FAILURE! Failure to win by KO! No boxer WANTS to fight for so long. No boxer PLANS to fight for so long (unless your Chris Byrd). Going the to the cards is a sign that whatever tactics and strategy you had implemented to beat your opponent did not work out optimally the way you wanted. Maybe not necessarily because you YOURSELF were bad, but because maybe your opponent was too good.

Anyway, considering longer round fights from previous times against current 12 round boxers penalises modern fighters in another way too. PREVIOUS boxers had 3 or more extra rounds up there sleeve in order to score a KO! If modern boxers were ALLOWED to continue boxing past 12 when they reached it, there would be more KO's scored and KO ratio's would be even higher today!

A generalization with the weakness and ko thing.There were 60 to 100 round fights at times past short two minute rounds. There were plenty of ko's and short fights back then because you cant train a loose chin and ther foot work was nothing like those of later days. There were more fights in towns than were charted down you only get to read about the famous ones. Realistically if you whipped one modern fighter back in time most of the boys who fight today would be bawling about lack of rules, not brawling for their life as you had to do to survive. Plenty of people fighting these days with a weakness they can hide behind because of the rules, gloves,better techniques, better refs. Many are here now with such size and reach they can and do spend the rounds moving around behind their jab, these types you could call smarter or one dimensional compared with some others from the near past too. Just as some from the near past are one dimension compared with some freakish skilled fighters of today. Everything works both ways you cant generalise when theres such vast difference in rules. Those old bare fisters would grab an outstretched arm and roll their body weight around the outside of it throwing the opponent into the ropes,tread on feet, the elbow would always follow the missed punch in close,thumb in eye,head butts you name it,no stopping for little cuts back then.Fuck me Harry the windmill fought blind in one eye for years. The modern boys wouldnt be anywhere near a ring in the same situation.They were not weak cunts mate, they would wield an axe ,a pick or a sledge hammer all day and then train half the night.

Yes the rules have evolved/changed, which blurs the distinguishment of what it means to even be a "boxer" let alone just a "HW".

I find it amusing sometimes today when modern fans complain about Wladimir's or even somewhat nostalgic fans about Ali's "holding" when back in the very old days, wrestling was BUILT into boxing.

I personally, Andre, think that the modern fighters could better adapt to an older system though, whereas a more ancient fighter, no matter how hard he tried, would simply be knocked out anyway.

Now we're moving into my subjective opinion though so I guess yours is equally valid here.

One further thing you have to consider though, is that in the past, where fights went for more rounds, you MUST consider how many fights, as you have alluded to, ACTUALLY WENT that many rounds!

I will consider 13 rounds+ to capture all previous eras...

- Of the approximately 70,000 fights across all eras, only 1,600, 2%! went 13+ rounds! They are extremely rare in the history of HW boxing!

- Of the 80 or so HW champs, only HALF of them even HAD such a long fight at all!

- Such fights always involved not only weaker punches but also a lot of missed punches and a lot of clinching.

- Most of the champs that DID have these longer fights only had 1 or 2 of them.

The 5 HW champs in history who had the MOST over-long fights were,

Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, Muhammad Ali, Marvin Hart, Tommy Burns...

All of them cruisers, light heavies or even middleweights by todays standards. And all of them featherfists by even the THEN standards!

There punches were weaker than todays punches and their opponents were weaker too!

I personally feel that nostalgists who claim "past boxers fought more rounds, had better ring stamina" are converting failures, or lacking qualities into virtues to protect legacies. Boxing is not a marathon to me, who can last the longest, for me it's who can either knock their opponent out or win the most number of rounds within the specified limit.

But the REAL clincher is this, when considering MODERN HW (200+), there have only been 31! fights in boxing history that have gone more than 12 rounds! 31 in history! Of which total featherfists Johnson and Ali are responsible for 15 of these failures alone!

And 215+ overlong fights (about the weight of a cruiser on fight night or roughly the smallest HW today) only 12 times in history!

I was never talking just HW. I was thinking more of eras and why. But for some reason thats where the major concentration of general public has always seemed to be the world champ was the largest and best I suppose is the thought behind it. I much prefer the lighter weights speed and actions.

Also on your side of thinking for the modern fighter; is they get much more power through body mechanics coming all the way from the big toe by the use of modern gripping shoes instead of flat leather shoes and talc tray in the corner.

Modern have all the benefits you've mentioned and more. Shame some of them havent the heart or balls of the old fighters eh? I think thats why Im attracted more to the mid to lighter Mexican fighters now Im thinking about it.

[Max Power]

I was never talking just HW. I was thinking more of eras and why. But for some reason thats where the major concentration of general public has always seemed to be the world champ was the largest and best I suppose is the thought behind it. I much prefer the lighter weights speed and actions.

Also on your side of thinking for the modern fighter; is they get much more power through body mechanics coming all the way from the big toe by the use of modern gripping shoes instead of flat leather shoes and talc tray in the corner.

Modern have all the benefits you've mentioned and more. Shame some of them havent the heart or balls of the old fighters eh? I think thats why Im attracted more to the mid to lighter Mexican fighters now Im thinking about it.

Yeah I cannot argue against the better equipment thing Andre. Better performance and safety equipment and all that too you are right.

On the heart and balls thing though I fully disagree but this is a subjective assessment that I can't prove or disprove in any way. If you think they had better determination/motivation or just plain guts back in the day, that's your prerogative Andre.

I would much prefer to be in the ring with someone like Ali or Johnson than I would with a Tyson or a Klitschko personally, and would be more apt to try much harder too because the stakes were much lower.

You've mentioned gloves before being thinner back in the day. That's an interesting issue. Today's boxers with thicker gloves actually have far greater incidence of pugilistic dementia (or punch drunkenness) because their skin and bones are better protected that they absorb far more damage before stoppage.

I have researched in a study somewhere which escapes me now that the boxers were not so brain damaged by the use of bare knuckles or only thin gloves.

But of course the price to pay then was obviously far greater and deforming, sometimes horrific structural damage to skin, and bones of the face and bones etc. that society would never accept today. Brain damage is mostly a long term and most times not immediately visible effect which is how it goes under the radar.