Quote Originally Posted by Alpha View Post
There are so many variables between the past and present that it is a really hard thing to compare. Depending on how deep you are going, it is not as simple as picking out 1 fighter from this night to another fighter on another night.

Things like length of training camps, how long before previous bouts, weigh in etc. Even dedication and focus. Some fighters today have many distractions outside the ring. How would an old timer react to today's society and vice versa.
Agreed. I try to see how certain fighters would fit into other eras. For example, for as great as Mayweather was, could he have been considered as great back in the 40’s or 50’s? I say that because he has a long history of hand problems and he wouldn’t get the rest he needed. If his hands started to be a problem, he would start to lose fights that he shouldn’t.

In an opposite view, maybe some fighters who were very durable had much more of an advantage because they were able to keep fighting at a good pace throughout their career and could catch many great fighters on bad days. Maybe these old durable fighters wouldn’t do as well if that advantage was gone because their opponents always got training camps to come in in tip top shape.

I think all eras have their advantages and disadvantages. One thing I’ve heard that I like is that great athletes find a way to win no matter what. So I think great fighters in any era would most likely be successful in all eras.