dirk2686 wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 10:13
One thing I'd add about the Lewis comments. (And Lewis is probably my favourite British fighter of all time.)
He's now regarded as a legitimate all time great, but if you'd mentioned Lewis in that context in the mid 90's, when the McCall loss was fresh in the mind and he was seeming to struggle at times against the likes of Mercer and Bruno, people would have laughed at the idea of him being seen as a great.
I'm not saying for a second Joshua beats Lewis at this stage. But I do think we have a tendency to rate the past more highly compared to the present in every era. Put it this way; I think if Joshua ends up beating Wilder and Fury and retires at, say, 35 with one or two losses, ten years after that I think people will be asking the question.
I said more or less the same thing (about underrating boxers of the present until such time as they are no longer of the present) on another thread a couple of days back. It's human nature and I think it's only youngsters who don't do it, but then they tend to regard fighters of today as better than anyone who came before.
It's funny I still remember becoming aware of Lennox Lewis as a boxer. No Internet back then of course. I couldn't have told you whether he was black or white, tall or short, orthodox or southpaw, boxer or puncher.
All I could have told you with any certainty was that he was a very good young amateur heavyweight who was really starting to get people to sit up and pay attention ... oh .. and that he was Canadian
jamamb wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 10:35
people need to remember that aj has only been a pro for 4.5 years. people are lol-ing at him being compared to guys like lewis, but they are comparing him to lewis with a full career. look at lewis after 4.5 years pro.
because aj has done so much so quickly, its easy to remember hes probably not even close to done his career and maybe not even near his peak. in another 5 years hell still only be 33, the same age wilder is turning this year. around 5 years younger then ortiz, povetkin, pulev, etc
True that. I'm guilty of that, but you make a fair point. AJ is light years ahead of a mid/upper 20's Lewis and he's my favourite HW of all time. (not who I think is best, but favourite...strong difference). You stopped me in my tracks.
dirk2686 wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 10:13
One thing I'd add about the Lewis comments. (And Lewis is probably my favourite British fighter of all time.)
He's now regarded as a legitimate all time great, but if you'd mentioned Lewis in that context in the mid 90's, when the McCall loss was fresh in the mind and he was seeming to struggle at times against the likes of Mercer and Bruno, people would have laughed at the idea of him being seen as a great.
I'm not saying for a second Joshua beats Lewis at this stage. But I do think we have a tendency to rate the past more highly compared to the present in every era. Put it this way; I think if Joshua ends up beating Wilder and Fury and retires at, say, 35 with one or two losses, ten years after that I think people will be asking the question.
once (IF) he achieves that I’ll be first to put him in the same bracket as the great HWs. Until he fights at that level consistently and achieves those goals i struggle to agree with those who think he’d leather Lewis.
With regards to people who “rate the past more highly than the present”. I think anyone that does so takes into account and forms their argument around relative achievement over “who beats who”. Tommy Burns was 5ft 7 and between 169 - 190lbs when he won and defended the HW title back in the 1890s.
Does this HW world champion who defended the title 10 times rate higher than say Audley Harrison who undoubtedly would’ve beaten him?
dirk2686 wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 10:13
One thing I'd add about the Lewis comments. (And Lewis is probably my favourite British fighter of all time.)
He's now regarded as a legitimate all time great, but if you'd mentioned Lewis in that context in the mid 90's, when the McCall loss was fresh in the mind and he was seeming to struggle at times against the likes of Mercer and Bruno, people would have laughed at the idea of him being seen as a great.
I'm not saying for a second Joshua beats Lewis at this stage. But I do think we have a tendency to rate the past more highly compared to the present in every era. Put it this way; I think if Joshua ends up beating Wilder and Fury and retires at, say, 35 with one or two losses, ten years after that I think people will be asking the question.
once (IF) he achieves that I’ll be first to put him in the same bracket as the great HWs. Until he fights at that level consistently and achieves those goals i struggle to agree with those who think he’d leather Lewis.
With regards to people who “rate the past more highly than the present”. I think anyone that does so takes into account and forms their argument around relative achievement over “who beats who”. Tommy Burns was 5ft 7 and between 169 - 190lbs when he won and defended the HW title back in the 1890s.
Does this HW world champion who defended the title 10 times rate higher than say Audley Harrison who undoubtedly would’ve beaten him?
Of course not and you're absolutely right that you need to place fighters (or any sportsman) into the correct context.
It's a related point but I think we tend to overdo this in boxing. If you were an athletics fan, or a tennis fan, you could make a case for Jesse Owens or Rod Laver being the greatest of all time without the need to suggest they could beat Usain Bolt or Roger Federer (which they palpably couldn't, or for that matter, Linford Christie and Andy Murray.)
With boxing, I think you're absolutely spot on to say someone like Harrison would beat Burns - but I bet a lot of people disagree. I was definitely in the minority on here suggesting fighters today were generally fitter than their 1930's counterparts.
dirk2686 wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 10:13
One thing I'd add about the Lewis comments. (And Lewis is probably my favourite British fighter of all time.)
He's now regarded as a legitimate all time great, but if you'd mentioned Lewis in that context in the mid 90's, when the McCall loss was fresh in the mind and he was seeming to struggle at times against the likes of Mercer and Bruno, people would have laughed at the idea of him being seen as a great.
I'm not saying for a second Joshua beats Lewis at this stage. But I do think we have a tendency to rate the past more highly compared to the present in every era. Put it this way; I think if Joshua ends up beating Wilder and Fury and retires at, say, 35 with one or two losses, ten years after that I think people will be asking the question.
once (IF) he achieves that I’ll be first to put him in the same bracket as the great HWs. Until he fights at that level consistently and achieves those goals i struggle to agree with those who think he’d leather Lewis.
With regards to people who “rate the past more highly than the present”. I think anyone that does so takes into account and forms their argument around relative achievement over “who beats who”. Tommy Burns was 5ft 7 and between 169 - 190lbs when he won and defended the HW title back in the 1890s.
Does this HW world champion who defended the title 10 times rate higher than say Audley Harrison who undoubtedly would’ve beaten him?
Of course not and you're absolutely right that you need to place fighters (or any sportsman) into the correct context.
It's a related point but I think we tend to overdo this in boxing. If you were an athletics fan, or a tennis fan, you could make a case for Jesse Owens or Rod Laver being the greatest of all time without the need to suggest they could beat Usain Bolt or Roger Federer (which they palpably couldn't, or for that matter, Linford Christie and Andy Murray.)
With boxing, I think you're absolutely spot on to say someone like Harrison would beat Burns - but I bet a lot of people disagree. I was definitely in the minority on here suggesting fighters today were generally fitter than their 1930's counterparts.
Of course they wouldn't, but that's not why they are regarded in a bracket reserved for all time greats. They are revered as best of their generation, when you normalise greatness against their generation. It's like Pele, regarded as THE all time great, is still considered leagues above Messi and Ronaldo (well not by me), but if Pele was inserted into modern day football in his prime, he'd probably be playing in the Championship.
Rob3_142 wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 03:03Of course they wouldn't, but that's not why they are regarded in a bracket reserved for all time greats. They are revered as best of their generation, when you normalise greatness against their generation. It's like Pele, regarded as THE all time great, is still considered leagues above Messi and Ronaldo (well not by me), but if Pele was inserted into modern day football in his prime, he'd probably be playing in the Championship.
I agree - but I'm saying that there is definitely a running theme in boxing that not only are the fighters of the past the best, they are also actually better in a head to head comparison.
As you say, Pele isn't as good as Messi. How many people would say that Ali would beat Joshua? I bet it would be a clear majority.
Rob3_142 wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 03:03Of course they wouldn't, but that's not why they are regarded in a bracket reserved for all time greats. They are revered as best of their generation, when you normalise greatness against their generation. It's like Pele, regarded as THE all time great, is still considered leagues above Messi and Ronaldo (well not by me), but if Pele was inserted into modern day football in his prime, he'd probably be playing in the Championship.
I agree - but I'm saying that there is definitely a running theme in boxing that not only are the fighters of the past the best, they are also actually better in a head to head comparison.
As you say, Pele isn't as good as Messi. How many people would say that Ali would beat Joshua? I bet it would be a clear majority.
No, I do agree. It's always easy to remember the great stuff from 20 years ago (thus filtering out the rubbish), and the next generation of boxing fans will remember Joshua as an ATG. There are few fighters historically that have won 3/4 HW belts in such quick fashion, irrespective of the depth of talent pool (which I believe this generation will not be regarded as the all time weakest).
