70s-90s compared to 30s boxers

[Primo Carnera]

I think there's no dispelling the fact that boxers from the '20s and 30's were infinitely more static and robotic than their counterparts of today. Their greatness is based on comparisons within their own eras.

Lots of you don't follow baseball on here. But similar arguments are used when talking about guys like Babe Ruth, et al. Ruth was totally dominant in his time, and totally worthy of the admiration, lofty, and ATG status that has followed his memory throughout the years. But let's face it. Changes in the game... specialized relief pitching... higher pitching mounds... advances in pitch variations... and others... make it very likely that if you suddenly dropped Ruth into today's game... that just maybe he wouldn't be as "head and shoulders" above everyone else.

Like I've said before, boxing has evolved in size and technique. Heavyweight is easier to contrast "now vs then" because heavyweight has no upper limit. Heavyweights back then were smaller. Joe Louis was 6'2"... averaged 200 pounds. A cruiserweight by today's standards. Tough to go up against a 6'-9", 250-260 pound guy with more mobility and hand speed. It's a big ask.

Also, it's obvious watching tapes from old fights. Yes... movement at the waist was limited. There was more plodding. It was just the style back then. It's no slight on past champions. It's just the way it was.

Let's try basketball.

In the old days, nobody could dunk... and a preferred shot was the 2-handed set shot. Go into the NBA with something like that today, and you're likely to never score not even once in a real game. Yet the old champions are still revered. It's all part of the evolution of sports.

This post isn't for you,it's specifically for people who have said for years those guys in 30s could beat guys in 70s-90s,they need to respond

Why am I insane?

is the louis era more advanced or as advanced as those guys in the video

Why am I insane?

[TIC]

is the louis era more advanced or as advanced as those guys in the video

post one quote from this forum of a member saying that the louis era is more advanced or as advanced as those in the video. please provide the link to the thread & the post number

[Spicoli]

Honestly, I think by simplistically broad stroking entire "eras" you're just incapable of discussing specific fighters' case by case. You've been given case by case examples from multiple members here then revert to exactly where you started. Foreman fought in the 70's so therefore he was more 'advanced' aka tech, timing, defense, skilled than Louis who fought in the 30's. Did they not fight in said eras. Is that how this paint by numbers works? Redundant rubbish.

[joe smith]

Honestly, I think by simplistically broad stroking entire "eras" you're just incapable of discussing specific fighters' case by case. You've been given case by case examples from multiple members here then revert to exactly where you started. Foreman fought in the 70's so therefore he was more 'advanced' aka tech, timing, defense, skilled than Louis who fought in the 30's. Did they not fight in said eras. Is that how this paint by numbers works? Redundant rubbish.

Why should I not stick to the topic if it's said specifically the way I said it and asked?, I ask the questions specifically to stick to a certain topic which means stick to that nothing else cause anything else is going away from the topic, and I never said louis only so you just made that up I have mutiple boxers in my video which is showing 4 fighters at once, I don't need to discuss certain fighters cause I'm comparing general movements between era's

Louis is included in all the 30s compare because people have said for years how skilled he was, if they said someone else in the 30s was the most skilled I would've had them instead

[NoSavingByTheBell]

Is this Alpha

[Master]

So you are comparing 20 years over 10 years. Those 20 years had most of the best heavyweights in the history.

The 70-90's boxers were better than most of todays boxers so what does that do your theory that fighters get better each generation?

[joe smith]

So you are comparing 20 years over 10 years. Those 20 years had most of the best heavyweights in the history.

The 70-90's boxers were better than most of todays boxers so what does that do your theory that fighters get better each generation?

Wilder is raw and no better technique than the fighters you criticise in the 1920's. This is you're comment so prove they we're show the matches why is this the 3rd day asking this now?

[NoSavingByTheBell]

So you are comparing 20 years over 10 years. Those 20 years had most of the best heavyweights in the history.

The 70-90's boxers were better than most of todays boxers so what does that do your theory that fighters get better each generation?

Wilder is raw and no better technique than the fighters you criticise in the 1920's. This is you're comment so prove they we're show the matches why is this the 3rd day asking this now?

Master Has asked you a straightforward and valid question which you cannot seem to refute. So you have resorted to ad hominem insults and milktoast.