When

[El Gamo]

When I refer to fighter's peak, I mean the time when his skills were at their sharpest, not necessarily when he had his biggest win.

For example, of the fighters you named....

Hagler's biggest win is probably the Hearns fight, but he was already past his peak at that point, he was in his 30s. His peak was probably a few years before that.

Holyfield's biggest win was against Tyson, but he was already in his 30s and had been thru lots of wars at that time. His peak skills-wise was in the very early 90s IMO.

Whitaker's peak started in '89 with the wins over Haugen and Ramirez and extended until about '94. His win over Chavez was right near the end of his peak. His peak probably could've lasted longer, but it ended prematurely because he lost focus.

Excellent post,totally agree.CC.

[El Kabong]

aint nobody invincible mate , It’s a matter of picking the right opponents while you can !

I will say with the competition he had around 86-88.....he certainly SEEMED to have the division at his feet.

But IMO Holyfield would have beat him 100% of the time and Foreman would beat him too

[Scrap]

Lords has got it Bang on. cc

[Fenster]

Does your physical peak and mental peak go hand in hand?

[Fenster]

Good topic Scrap...Giving this a bit more thought

When was Kostya Tsyzu at his peak?

[Scrap]

Fens, Good question, Maybe after his 14 or 16th fight. He had 300 amatuer fights and for my money was the best Am of his era. He had a lot of ware and tare from the amatuers and wasnt young when he turned Pro his physical and mental awareness levels were peaking at that time. As an amatuer he was a ringer for Chavez a Russian with an American style was the first thing I noticed about him very unusual at that time. Hes one fighter who should have been based in the States it would have been a different ball game. Wish I could have got him, like everybody else.

[Fenster]

So would you say he was passed his best when he lost to Phillips?

[RozzySean]

Obviously everyone is an individual and people develop at different rates, but statistics in other sports reveal that a male atheletes peak performance years are usually between age 26 and 30. Of course there are other factors - conditioning, lifestyle, desire, but looking at the whole, large sample size, 26 is often the breakout year for baseball and football players. Some develop earlier and some develop later and some stretch out the period of peak performance much longer. Usually, it's the greats who can keep up that high level into their thirties.

The paradigm does seem to be shifting in the last few years. More and more athletes are performing at peak or near peak levels well into their 30's and even near peak levels into their 40's, but IN GENERAL, looking at the 4 year period from 26 to 30, plus or minus a year, will give you a pretty good idea of an boxers peak.

[Scrap]

Fens that would be about right. SEAN it depends on the altitude of your endevere, preparation, and body maintainance, but as you say you peak at the end of your 4th 7 year cycle 28 at 32 its downhill from there its not saying a lot for an old cunt like me

[Fenster]

Scrap, Kostya was passed his best when losing to Phillips, that means he was passed his best for another 13 victories (some of his greatest) and the next eight years of his career, until losing again.

Now I see this sort of backs-up your original poser...he's a fighter that recorded some of his best wins past his peak

But isn't it a bit too convenient to explain careers and losses like that?

[Scrap]

I think its fact, What people dont seem to understand about taking fights is when. thats what a good matchmaker worth his salt comes in. A fighter can look a million one year, but a good judge will know if hes had one tomany or not Boxed for 16 months and the attitude in the gym by a phone call to the cotacts theyve made over a period of time. Its all about money and a bit of bullying, or for the management to have the bolocks to tell them to go fuck themselves and never get anymore work,you take your choice.

[Fenster]

Scrap, I understand the importance of making the right fights at the right time but not sure how it applies to the TOP level

Sticking with Tsyzu - does that mean his team made a bad match for him against Phillips? Did he "go" overnight against Phillips? Were all the matches he won after Phillips due to good matchmaking?

He beat some bloody good fighters, didn't he?

[Scrap]

Fens The results at the end of the day is mostly down to When. If you look about theyre all over the place. If youre a young gun without backing youre not in the picture. I call it the veterans tour, Case history. Barerra v Morales great fighters past there best fight each other terrific. someone decides to bring a young gun in whose moving up in weight whose not proven at that weight. In comes Pac young fit wants it bad call. Over the years its happened a lot its called the end of an era enter the new

[RozzySean]

Scrap, Kostya was passed his best when losing to Phillips, that means he was passed his best for another 13 victories (some of his greatest) and the next eight years of his career, until losing again.

Now I see this sort of backs-up your original poser...he's a fighter that recorded some of his best wins past his peak

But isn't it a bit too convenient to explain careers and losses like that?

A great fighter can take a loss in the middle of their prime if it's a bad matchup against a quality fighter, and just because you are past your absolute peak doesn't mean you can give your most compelling performances.

[Scrap]

Sean It may seem that way, but a lot has to do with psyhcodynamics plus muscle memory. There comes a time when youre not what you think you are, and sometimes it happens when you least expect it and the motor units dont respond you stop motoring, its there to see. But we dont see the wood for the trees.