Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
I'm going to against the majority and say no. I think to be fighting 15 round fights sometimes just a few weeks after each other shows serious levels of physical fitness. However, the definition of the past is the problem here. Are these fighters more physically & technically gifted than the fighters of the 20s & 30s by and large, yes I think they are. More than those of the 50s, 60s & 70s? I think not.
When you look at the modern Heavyweights (and by that I mean the past 20 years) is there anyone more physically fit than those of the 60s & 70s, and anyone truly more technically gifted than the best of those eras? I don't think so. I was watching the Foreman-Norton fight the other night, and I was just thinking, those guys are too well-conditioned to be modern Heavies. I do agree there has been a moderate improvement in the technical aspect, however I feel that the fighters where this has had the greatest impact is those who were on the lower tiers below the elite. There has definitely been a physical & technical improvement among that level of fighter, however I think the elite of any eras would have been able to hang with each other.
I think guys like Sugar Ray Robinson, Willie Pep & Benny Leonard would have been capable of being true greats in any era, because they really were special. I think you give a guy like SRR all the things modern boxers have, like 4-6 months between fights & he could have had a great record. I also think one of the reasons why I think boxing has not felt the impact of improved physical training is because it remains reliant on training regimes that have been around for decades, ie running, skipping, bagwork, sparring etc. Ironically these basic techniques remain considered some of the best physical training techniques in the world. The fact that most of boxing remains away from the world of modern gyms which seem more built towards body-structuring as opposed to physical fitness leads me to believe that there have not been as significant advances in physical fitness as there have been in other sports, which for my money are merely catching up with boxing. However, the one area where there has undoubtedly been dramatic improvement is nutrition, which has obviously helped.
I think we have a tendency to overplay & understate the quality of old-time fighters. People either make out they were unbeatable, and don't give due credit to modern guys, or people make too much of a present fighter's talent & make out he would have beaten all and sundry back in the day. On a brief note to JoeyUK, on the football argument, I really disagree with you, whilst there has been a dramatic improvement in the physical fitness of footballers, this has often been to the detriment of the technical abilities on show in previous decades, most particularly in Britain. I will disagree very strongly with the notion modern footballers are better, although that's a discussion for off-topic or let's get it on.
Bookmarks