SONNY LISTON VS ANTHONY JOSHUA

[Kalan]

We saw heavies get bigger. We saw the sport get far worse. That's more athleticism? Common sense dictates athletes can't keep getting stronger and faster. They plateud some time ago. These "superior"athletes are all enhanced. Bolt like the rest of his competitors is juiced. Most sports are now as real as pro wrestling.

You have a generational bias that doesn't quit... Plus you're partial to Americans and hate Europeans.. The evolution of mankind is making athletes stronger and faster -- plus advanced nutrition and strength training science.

Athletes were juiced in the 1970's... The 60's and 70's were the steroid era where many athletes were taking steroids because they were legal and they didn't test for them... Taking steroids to try to obtain athletic enhancement destroys your health... Side effects include: adrenal tumors…Myopathy… high blood pressure… enlarged heart...muscle weakness… Osteoporosis… Cataracts and Glaucoma... Fatty liver disease... shrunken testicles... blurred vision... diabetes... kidney damage and many other problems, but those were some of the most common health problems in the steroid era...

Ali and Frazier had a lot of health issues that may have been caused by abusing steroids... To curtail these health problems steroids were outlawed... Not only steroids, but any product that might give you an athletic enhancement is also banned because the abuse of these drugs and substances invariably leads to health issues.

Nowadays athletes are enhanced by great nutrition and and advanced strength training science... Any PED cheat is caught and punished and his reputation is destroyed... Only a very tiny percentage of active boxers try to cheat..

Most positive PED tests have been the result of contamination.... Eat a slice of Texas cow that was injected with a steroid, you'll test positive... You take a masking agent that's in a blood pressure med, you'll test positive... You drink the wrong sports drink, or take the wrong over-the-counter supplement you'll test positive... You go to a party where people are smoking marijuana, you'll test positive.. You buy and use the wrong nasal decongestant, you'll test positive.

[Ambling Alp II]

The problem with the Cooney fights with Lyle, Young, and Norton is that they provide extremely compelling evidence that Cooney would have beaten them prime for prime. If a fighter slightly past their prime gets brutally demolished in that matter that strongly suggests they would lose even if they were at their best. Despite being past their prime fighters generally maintain their durability for a while. They don't suddenly lose their ability to take a shot. If these guys were capable of beating Cooney at their best I would have expected them to beat Cooney even at this stage or at least put up a much better fight. Mike Tyson was farther past his best against Lewis than these guys were against Cooney and still absorbed a tremendous beating over 8 rounds before he finally collapsed.

As far as Foreman-Moorer goes Foreman ranks much higher among 70s heavyweights than Moorer does among 90s heavyweights so I don't find Moorer losing to be shocking nor does it make it me think the 70s match the 90s. Against someone like Lennox Lewis Foreman would lose badly.

A fighter that is far past his best doesn't take a shot as well as used to. He doesn't have the recuperative powers that he once had. He also doesn't have the defense to avoid the punishment in the first place. He also is not able to mount an offense like once did. I can give you many examples of a very good or great fighter getting stopped early when they are well past it.

No, Tyson was not farther past his prime than Lyle, Young, and Norton were. They were much further past it than Tyson.

Lyle was 39 years old and had been a contender for several years. Young was no longer a contender and was now a drug addict. Norton was almost 38, and had looked awful in his last few fights. It was obvious to everyone at the time that their best days were long gone.

Tyson was certainly past his prime vs Lewis. However, he was younger than Norton and Lyle. He was still the #2 ranked contender. A lot of people actually thought he would be Lewis. Btw -Tyson was actually fighting a guy who older than himself.

As for Foreman and Moorer goes- Of course you are dismissing even though doing so goes against your own logic.
You made a big deal about a former champion (Patterson) from the 1950s beating a contender from the 1970s (Bonavena).
That was supposed to be damning evidence against the 1970s.

However, when a fighter from the 1970s (Foreman) beats the lineal champion (Moorer), you dismiss it.
Btw, Foreman was 45 when he beat Moorer, 8 years older than Patterson was when he beat Bonavena.
Foreman and Holmes success in the 1990s is a lot more important than Patterson beating Bonavena in the 1970s.

[Cojimar 1946]

Tyson's prime ended circa 1997 so vs Lewis he was more than 4 years removed from his prime. On the other hand I would say that Lyle and Norton's primes ended in 1977 so they were much closer to their best. Norton had just beaten Tex Cobb less than a year earlier. Also there is no logical argument for Tyson being the number 2 contender. Many heavyweights would have beaten that version of Tyson and I would pick him to lose to Ruiz and Rahman by that stage. He may not have even been a top 10 heavyweight.

[Cojimar 1946]

Also, I'm not really invested in the idea that the 90s are a great era. I have argued that the current era is better than the 90s and I don't see what Foreman's success in the 90s has to do with how good Wladimir's era is.

[Cojimar 1946]

An old Foreman winning a belt in the 1990s only reinforces my argument that many top heavyweights from Wladimir's era would do well in the 90s. For example a prime Povetkin is more formidable than the 1994 Foreman and so is Wilder.

[Kalan]

Also, I'm not really invested in the idea that the 90s are a great era. I have argued that the current era is better than the 90s and I don't see what Foreman's success in the 90s has to do with how good Wladimir's era is.

Exactly.... The 90's weren't great, but were a Hell of a lot better than the 70's.. Holmes never suffered defeat in the 70's and was roundly ducked by Foreman and Ali.. Holmes suffered 3 defeats in the 80's and 3 more in the 90’s.

Foreman didn’t fight the top Heavyweights of the 90’s except Holyfield... He lost his first 2 Title shots and got a lucky win over accidental Heavyweight Champion Michael Moorer... Holyfield was very sick in his 1st Moorer fight and trashed Moorer in their rematch... Foreman was trashed by Moorer for 10 rounds and got lucky. Then he cherry-picked his challengers. Holmes beat a top 90’s Heavyweight in Ray Mercer when he was 42. Holmes was a master boxer and Mercer was a greenie. Holmes also lost to Holyfield and McCall so his success was mixed... Holmes was an 80's Heavyweight.

Mike Tyson fought most of his fights and most of his Title fights in the 80's, a decade where he went undefeated and unchallenged. He was 23 when he entered the 90's at 37-0 and suffered his first 3 defeats in that decade. He suffered 3 more losses in the 00's, but only the loss to Lewis was significant. Tyson bragged he’d kill the older Lewis and eat his children but he was mastered from the opening bell.

Ali lost to 80’s Heavyweight Leon Spinks... Spinks was at least as green as Ali was old.

Jimmy Young lost to 80’s Heavyweights Ossie Ocasio and Michael Dokes when they had only 11 and 14 fights.

Joe Bugner got 2 shots at Muhammad Ali, but Bugner lost to 80’s Heavyweights Steffen Tangstad, Frank Bruno, and Marvis Frazier… Marvis Frazier was a green kid with 9 professional fights when he easily out-boxed Bugner.

Oscar Bonavena was ranked 3rd in 70. He’d be a prelim swinger today

Jimmy Ellis was ranked 3rd in ’72. He could never win an elimination tournament or be highly ranked today

Jimmy Young was ranked 2nd in ’75. His record was 16-4-2 and he had a featherweight punch.

Duane Bobick was ranked 4th in 1976. He wouldn’t be ranked in the top 30 today

Leon Spinks was ranked 3rd in ’78. He was 7-1-1. He’d be smashed by today's top Cruiserweights.

[Ambling Alp II]

You can arbrtraily say when the guys prime is, but that doesn't mean he slid down the exact amount in say three years as another guy. You generally slide a little more down each year.
Lyle was completely shot by the time Cooney fought him. Had nothing left. Norton barely beat Cobb, whom he would have shutout in his prime. He barely survived Scott LeDoux whom he would have manhandled in his prime.
Literally everyone still thought Tyson was a contender at the time. He had not lost since the Holyfield fight. If you were a boxing fan at the time, you would have as well.

The 1990s was not as good as the 1970s. It was better than the 2000 or 2010s. That is what I have been saying all along.
You can keep saying this guy form the 2000s or that guy form the 2010s would beat someone from an earlier decade. That isn't evidence. That is your opinion which is based on an inherent bias.
There are obvious indications that show the 1970s were better than the 1990s. There are obvious indications that the 1990s were better than the 2000s and 2010s.

Corrie Sanders fought all through the 1990s. Was never a contender. At the age of 37, Sanders he took on 27-year Wladimir Klitschko. He crushed Klitschko in two rounds. (earlier in his career, Klitschko got stopped by journeyman Ross Purrity.)
This was not a split decision fight that could have gone the other way. This is Klitschko getting his ass kicked by a old guy who never was that good in prime and who was about to retire.

Klitschko then goes on to be the best heavyweight in the world for about 8 years.
If the 2000s and 2010s really was that good, there is no way Klitschko would have been the best fighter of that time. There should have been several guys blowing him out.
Instead Klitschko beat one stiff (I mean contender) after another in boring, forgettable fights that nobody even talks about.

By your own logic of supposed 1950s fighter Patterson beating supposed 1970s fighter Bonavena being a big deal, this has to be a big deal. A much bigger deal.
Bonavena was never close to be the best of the 1970s. Klitschko was the best in his era for several years.

Connect the dots. The heavyweight division has sucked for a long time.

[Kalan]

The '70's SUCKED!!!!

Ali lost to 80’s Heavyweight Leon Spinks... Spinks was at least as green as Ali was old.

Jimmy Young lost to 80’s Heavyweights Ossie Ocasio and Michael Dokes when they had only 11 and 14 fights.

Joe Bugner got 2 shots at Muhammad Ali, but Bugner lost to 80’s Heavyweights Steffen Tangstad, Frank Bruno, and Marvis Frazier… Marvis Frazier was a green kid with 9 professional fights when he easily out-boxed Bugner.

Oscar Bonavena was ranked 3rd in 70. He’d be a prelim swinger today

Jimmy Ellis was ranked 3rd in ’72. He could never win an elimination tournament or be highly ranked today

Jimmy Young was ranked 2nd in ’75. His record was 16-4-2 and he had a featherweight punch.

Duane Bobick was ranked 4th in 1976. He wouldn’t be ranked in the top 30 today

Leon Spinks was ranked 3rd in ’78. He was 7-1-1. He’d be smashed by today's top Cruiserweights.

Nobody can rank Klitschko off a fight where he still had gaping holes in his defense... Klitschko got nailed with the same type of shot that Rahman FLATTENED Lennox Lewis with... A LOTTERY SHOT... Klitschko got up, but never recovered.

In CONTRAST Ali got beaten from pillar to post by massive underdogs....

Mike Tyson got smeared for 10 rounds by 42-1 underdog Buster Douglas

Lennox Lewis got flattened twice by right hands... One was a precision counterpunch... One was a Hail Mary shot... But the fights prove that you can be upset by a 39-2... 6'4" X 225 southpaw, with very quick hands and a KO punch...

[Cojimar 1946]

I don't see any compelling evidence to suggest the 90s or the 70s were better than the current era. The 70s fighters would be at an enormous size disadvantage today. They didn't have skilled heavyweights that were 240+. The lack of success by Ali and Holmes sized heavyweights in recent eras is pretty damning evidence that the smaller heavyweights can no longer compete. Were not talking about a time period of 20+ years.

[Cojimar 1946]

Also, I don't see what bearing Klitschko has on the fighters of today. The younger fighters of Joshua's generation by and large never faced Klitschko and the current top 10 is mostly composed of guys who have risen to the top post-Klitschko.

[MrGuy]

We saw heavies get bigger. We saw the sport get far worse. That's more athleticism? Common sense dictates athletes can't keep getting stronger and faster. They plateud some time ago. These "superior"athletes are all enhanced. Bolt like the rest of his competitors is juiced. Most sports are now as real as pro wrestling.

You have a generational bias that doesn't quit... Plus you're partial to Americans and hate Europeans.. The evolution of mankind is making athletes stronger and faster -- plus advanced nutrition and strength training science.

Athletes were juiced in the 1970's... The 60's and 70's were the steroid era where many athletes were taking steroids because they were legal and they didn't test for them... Taking steroids to try to obtain athletic enhancement destroys your health... Side effects include: adrenal tumors…Myopathy… high blood pressure… enlarged heart...muscle weakness… Osteoporosis… Cataracts and Glaucoma... Fatty liver disease... shrunken testicles... blurred vision... diabetes... kidney damage and many other problems, but those were some of the most common health problems in the steroid era...

Ali and Frazier had a lot of health issues that may have been caused by abusing steroids... To curtail these health problems steroids were outlawed... Not only steroids, but any product that might give you an athletic enhancement is also banned because the abuse of these drugs and substances invariably leads to health issues.

Nowadays athletes are enhanced by great nutrition and and advanced strength training science... Any PED cheat is caught and punished and his reputation is destroyed... Only a very tiny percentage of active boxers try to cheat..

Most positive PED tests have been the result of contamination.... Eat a slice of Texas cow that was injected with a steroid, you'll test positive... You take a masking agent that's in a blood pressure med, you'll test positive... You drink the wrong sports drink, or take the wrong over-the-counter supplement you'll test positive... You go to a party where people are smoking marijuana, you'll test positive.. You buy and use the wrong nasal decongestant, you'll test positive.

Athletes in the past did use when it was legal. Most didnt. This is obvious by the slow progression of the 100m world record. Far more are using today. Then it was easy to get caught. Now it's almost undetectable. What's going on now has nothing to do with nutrition or evolution. Many athletes live on garbage. Nor advanced strength training. Training with weights hasn't changed. No new magic bullet workouts have been invented. It's all about better surfaces and undetectable drugs. Nobody runs a 9.58. This is the definitive steroid era. I'm biased agaonst Europeans because I think the Klitschko era and this one sucks? The American scene has been worse, so I'm not biased.

[MrGuy]

I don't see any compelling evidence to suggest the 90s or the 70s were better than the current era. The 70s fighters would be at an enormous size disadvantage today. They didn't have skilled heavyweights that were 240+. The lack of success by Ali and Holmes sized heavyweights in recent eras is pretty damning evidence that the smaller heavyweights can no longer compete. Were not talking about a time period of 20+ years.

Everyone in the division wants to compete at a heavier weight. You think Tyson or Holmes would struggle with most of the fighters we've seen in the past decade and a half? The smaller guys arent exactly in great numbers or high quality anymore. The terrible fighters of Wlads era are what tell me previous decades were much better than now.

[MrGuy]

You can arbrtraily say when the guys prime is, but that doesn't mean he slid down the exact amount in say three years as another guy. You generally slide a little more down each year.
Lyle was completely shot by the time Cooney fought him. Had nothing left. Norton barely beat Cobb, whom he would have shutout in his prime. He barely survived Scott LeDoux whom he would have manhandled in his prime.
Literally everyone still thought Tyson was a contender at the time. He had not lost since the Holyfield fight. If you were a boxing fan at the time, you would have as well.

The 1990s was not as good as the 1970s. It was better than the 2000 or 2010s. That is what I have been saying all along.
You can keep saying this guy form the 2000s or that guy form the 2010s would beat someone from an earlier decade. That isn't evidence. That is your opinion which is based on an inherent bias.
There are obvious indications that show the 1970s were better than the 1990s. There are obvious indications that the 1990s were better than the 2000s and 2010s.

Corrie Sanders fought all through the 1990s. Was never a contender. At the age of 37, Sanders he took on 27-year Wladimir Klitschko. He crushed Klitschko in two rounds. (earlier in his career, Klitschko got stopped by journeyman Ross Purrity.)
This was not a split decision fight that could have gone the other way. This is Klitschko getting his ass kicked by a old guy who never was that good in prime and who was about to retire.

Klitschko then goes on to be the best heavyweight in the world for about 8 years.
If the 2000s and 2010s really was that good, there is no way Klitschko would have been the best fighter of that time. There should have been several guys blowing him out.
Instead Klitschko beat one stiff (I mean contender) after another in boring, forgettable fights that nobody even talks about.

By your own logic of supposed 1950s fighter Patterson beating supposed 1970s fighter Bonavena being a big deal, this has to be a big deal. A much bigger deal.
Bonavena was never close to be the best of the 1970s. Klitschko was the best in his era for several years.

Connect the dots. The heavyweight division has sucked for a long time.

[Kalan]

Athletes in the past did use when it was legal. Most didnt. This is obvious by the slow progression of the 100m world record. Far more are using today. Then it was easy to get caught. Now it's almost undetectable. What's going on now has nothing to do with nutrition. Many athletes live on garbage. Nor advanced strength training. Training with weights hasn't changed. No new magic bullet workouts have been invented. It's all about faster surfaces an undetectable drugs. Nobody runs a 9.58. This is the definitive steroid era.

You're making stuff up with no fact... In 50 years the 100 meter sprint record is going to come down below today's mark. The reason this is a certainly is athletes keep getting bigger, stronger, and faster.

Most athletes DID use steroids in the 60's and 70's when PED's were legal... I was constantly offered Dianabol and other products. Guys I worked with took them and said I was foolish for refusing them... I never trusted anything that wasn't supervised and certified by the FDA and other federal agencies. I would never take a vitamin pill because they're fake. Bee pollen and other natural supplements are real foods.. They're okay to take.. Synthetic steroids are going to hurt you.

When I look at old body builders who are 10 or 15 years younger than me they look much older than me... They're physique is gone. Mine is still there. They look wasted.. Athletes today can look back and see the disasters of Liston, Ali, Frazier, Cleveland Williams, Quarry, Leon Spinks and other steroid era Heavyweights who wrecked their health.

Usain Bolt never used PEDs.. He is conscious of keeping his body healthy for the long term and abiding by the rules. Same with Anthony Joshua..The day some jizzbreath like Victor Conte will convince him to take PED's will never come.. Same with 99% of today's athletes - many of whom are holders of World Records never approached in the Steroid Era...

[Cojimar 1946]

I don't think Tyson or Holmes could beat Joshua although they could probably beat some of the guys in the top 10.

When it comes to talented smaller heavyweights there is plenty of talent at light heavyweight and cruiserweight in recent years. If the heavyweight division was as bad as some are suggesting I would expect many fighters from super middleweight on up would move to heavyweight for big paydays against easy opponents. Yet we don't see light heavyweights, cruiserweights etc taking the division by storm.

Andre Ward was a great fighter you would think he would have moved up to heavyweight for big paydays if he thought he could compete there.

[Kalan]

After Ward got his gift decision over Kovalev he said he was moving up to Cruiserweight and eventually to Heavyweight... I knew he was a lying piece of shitt.. He would have gotten crushed by the Cruisers.. He couldn't even handle guys in his own weight division so he wasn't going anywhere..

Roy Jones Jr. targeted John Ruiz - who was a wide open punching bag who floored and beat Holyfield... A proposal was made for Roy to fight Lennox Lewis... The next thing you knew Roy signed for an Antonio Tarver fight.

[MrGuy]

I don't think Tyson or Holmes could beat Joshua although they could probably beat some of the guys in the top 10.

When it comes to talented smaller heavyweights there is plenty of talent at light heavyweight and cruiserweight in recent years. If the heavyweight division was as bad as some are suggesting I would expect many fighters from super middleweight on up would move to heavyweight for big paydays against easy opponents. Yet we don't see light heavyweights, cruiserweights etc taking the division by storm.

Andre Ward was a great fighter you would think he would have moved up to heavyweight for big paydays if he thought he could compete there.

What has Joshua done to ever suggest he would beat Holmes or Tyson? Beat some if them? The divisions dreadful. They would trounce most easily. It's a big stretch to expect a super middle or light heavy to move up and compete at heavy. Even when the division was lighter.

[MrGuy]

Athletes in the past did use when it was legal. Most didnt. This is obvious by the slow progression of the 100m world record. Far more are using today. Then it was easy to get caught. Now it's almost undetectable. What's going on now has nothing to do with nutrition. Many athletes live on garbage. Nor advanced strength training. Training with weights hasn't changed. No new magic bullet workouts have been invented. It's all about faster surfaces an undetectable drugs. Nobody runs a 9.58. This is the definitive steroid era.

You're making stuff up with no fact... In 50 years the 100 meter sprint record is going to come down below today's mark. The reason this is a certainly is athletes keep getting bigger, stronger, and faster.

Most athletes DID use steroids in the 60's and 70's when PED's were legal... I was constantly offered Dianabol and other products. Guys I worked with took them and said I was foolish for refusing them... I never trusted anything that wasn't supervised and certified by the FDA and other federal agencies. I would never take a vitamin pill because they're fake. Bee pollen and other natural supplements are real foods.. They're okay to take.. Synthetic steroids are going to hurt you.

When I look at old body builders who are 10 or 15 years younger than me they look much older than me... They're physique is gone. Mine is still there. They look wasted.. Athletes today can look back and see the disasters of Liston, Ali, Frazier, Cleveland Williams, Quarry, Leon Spinks and other steroid era Heavyweights who wrecked their health.

Usain Bolt never used PEDs.. He is conscious of keeping his body healthy for the long term and abiding by the rules. Same with Anthony Joshua..The day some jizzbreath like Victor Conte will convince him to take PED's will never come.. Same with 99% of today's athletes - many of whom are holders of World Records never approached in the Steroid Era...

Record in 64' was 10.06. They ran on cinders, many had jobs, and they didn't train full time. They certainly didn't lift weights or do plyometric work. By the early 90s with guys training year round, no side jobs, running on artificial surfaces, training with weights and doing heavy plyometric work the record.....9.92. With all the advances that's it. Then it started to fall quickly and often to ridiculous lows. All his top competitors are juiced. How can he not be and beat all the top guys that are? Wake up. People have limits. They can't keep getting faster and stronger. This is the roid era.

[Kalan]

You making insanely biased accusations with not a shred of proof.... Bolt never took steroids... Athletes who cheat get caught... They also lose their health and lose their future... They're generally never heard from again unless their test was from a medication for an injury or health issue, or resulted from food contamination... It they were injecting or taking oral doses for performance enhancement they're never heard from again because their body is damaged.

Canadian Ben Johnson related his experience... His coach told him "Ben you have to listen. Everybody is taking steroids and nobody is getting caught. Listen to me. You will not get caught." Johnson reluctantly listened to his coach and believed him.. He got caught easily.. They nailed the exact steroid Johnson took, when he took it. and what dose he took.. They said, "This was a 5 alarm fire bell... Johnson was loaded with Stanozolol when he raced for the Olympic Gold Medal."

The drug damaged Johnson's liver... He was never heard from again in the sprinting world... Everybody in the world heard about it and knew Ben was a cheating MFer.

[MrGuy]

You making insanely biased accusations with not a shred of proof.... Bolt never took steroids... Athletes who cheat get caught... They also lose their health and lose their future... They're generally never heard from again unless their test was from a medication for an injury or health issue, or resulted from food contamination... It they were injecting or taking oral doses for performance enhancement they're never heard from again because their body is damaged.

Canadian Ben Johnson related his experience... His coach told him "Ben you have to listen. Everybody is taking steroids and nobody is getting caught. Listen to me. You will not get caught." Johnson reluctantly listened to his coach and believed him.. He got caught easily.. They nailed the exact steroid Johnson took, when he took it. and what dose he took.. They said, "This was a 5 alarm fire bell... Johnson was loaded with Stanozolol when he raced for the Olympic Gold Medal."

The drug damaged Johnson's liver... He was never heard from again in the sprinting world... Everybody in the world heard about it and knew Ben was a cheating MFer.

Yet at the same time you claim the top athletes of the 60s-70s were all on drugs. Bolt didn't take them but everyone else in his class did, and he still beat them all. It is easy to pass over and over now. Thats not bias its factual. See M. Jones. Johnson was a 10.3-10.4 guy clean. Using 9.79. Average to awesome on drugs. If he didnt fail hard to tell how low his times wouldve dropped. Bolts country I believe did dreadful qualifying for the Olympics. The next games they're a machine. Impossible.

[Kalan]

Marion Jones was nailed by drug tests for EPO, suspended and fined. Eventually she admitted everything after lying and bitching and bluffing her ass off. It's very tough for cheaters to admit they're a fraud and a criminal, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. You go from a hero to a zero in the public domain. That’s very tough to deal with, but every cheater is revealed as a charlatan.

Blood and urine samples are now frozen and stored. That's how they nailed all the cyclists and Lance Armstrong. When new tests are developed for new designer drugs they can go back and retest your past samples. Retroactively they take all your medals and awards away and fine the living crap out of you. Marion Jones's parents even had to sell their home to try to keep her out of prison. She ended up serving only 6 months. She probably should have gotten years.

There's tremendous shame and dishonor inherent with cheating... Marion Jones will be remembered as one of the biggest frauds in the history of sports and so will Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, Fernando Vargas and other cheaters. Once Vargas was caught he was done. He was still young, but he didn’t win or do anything after that.

The funny thing is, they could have done just as well without the drugs and wouldn't have destroyed their lives.

[MrGuy]

Marion Jones was nailed by drug tests for EPO, suspended and fined. Eventually she admitted everything after lying and bitching and bluffing her ass off. It's very tough for cheaters to admit they're a fraud and a criminal, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence. You go from a hero to a zero in the public domain. That’s very tough to deal with, but every cheater is revealed as a charlatan.

Blood and urine samples are now frozen and stored. That's how they nailed all the cyclists and Lance Armstrong. When new tests are developed for new designer drugs they can go back and retest your past samples. Retroactively they take all your medals and awards away and fine the living crap out of you. Marion Jones's parents even had to sell their home to try to keep her out of prison. She ended up serving only 6 months. She probably should have gotten years.

There's tremendous shame and dishonor inherent with cheating... Marion Jones will be remembered as one of the biggest frauds in the history of sports and so will Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, Fernando Vargas and other cheaters. Once Vargas was caught he was done. He was still young, but he didn’t win or do anything after that.

She did. After passing over 100 tests while using. That's the point.

[Kalan]

No she didn't pass over 100 tests... Those samples are frozen... They WILL get you.

She was talented enough to win without PEDs

[MrGuy]

No she didn't pass over 100 tests... Those samples are frozen... They WILL get you.

She was talented enough to win without PEDs

She was tested repeatedly while using and came up clean. It's not like she got caught as soon as she started.

[Ambling Alp II]

I don't see any compelling evidence to suggest the 90s or the 70s were better than the current era. The 70s fighters would be at an enormous size disadvantage today. They didn't have skilled heavyweights that were 240+. The lack of success by Ali and Holmes sized heavyweights in recent eras is pretty damning evidence that the smaller heavyweights can no longer compete. Were not talking about a time period of 20+ years.

That is your problem. You don't see what is right in front of you. All you see is weights and just assume that is an advantage.
You keep pointing to the lack of success of smaller heavyweights. Who are these smaller heavyweights who have failed? There simply aren't hardly any of them anymore. That doesn't mean that the the ones from previous era would not have done well today.
What has happened on the rare occasions when a skilled lighter guy had gone up against the 240 pound plus guys/ Again you can't explain Wilder. He keeps beating one bigger guy after another. He is no heavier than the typical guy of the 1990s. His last fight he was as light as Holmes, Ali etc typically were.

If these big guys in the last several years were so skilled, there would have a lot of great fights in the last 10-15 years. There have been none.
And again, Klitschko got stopped twice by non-contenders of the 1990s. Then he dominates for 8 years. That should not have happened. It happened becasue his competition was so weak. Connect the dots.