Are fighters stronger and fitter now or weaker?

[Ambling Alp II]

[Bundana]

Fighters are certinainly stronger and athletically fitter than yesteryear, but not nearly as 'hard,'

The "hard" part... how is it even possible to meassure that?

[Controversial]

Fighters are certinainly stronger and athletically fitter than yesteryear, but not nearly as 'hard,'

The "hard" part... how is it even possible to meassure that?

I'm guessing he meant life was harder in terms of money, opportunities, jobs etc

[Bundana]

Fighters are certinainly stronger and athletically fitter than yesteryear, but not nearly as 'hard,'

The "hard" part... how is it even possible to meassure that?

I'm guessing he meant life was harder in terms of money, opportunities, jobs etc

Yes, undoubtedly life was tough for a lot of people back during the depression years. But the everyday hardship - how did that manifest itself in the ring?

Did the boxers fight harder, willing to endure more pain, than their modern counterparts... or were the vast majority just trying to make a little extra money, against opponents in the same situation, with as little effort as possible?

Is it not plausible, that there was a "we're-all-in-the-same-boat" mentality, where boxers didn't really want to hurt each other... but instead just went through the motions, so they could all go home largely unscathed, with a few extra dollars in their pocket? Of course not all fights were like that - but I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect, that a fair percentage could have been this type of "go easy" on each other matches.

[pound per pound]

This kinda interests me about the old time fighters that fought sometimes hundreds of fights (over many years in some cases) and why a lot of fighters in more recent decades are pretty much done after 50 fights or so. Was it because the old timers were so much stronger and fitter or was it they got stronger and fitter over the decades meaning their bodies aren't capable of having multiple fights? Fighters like Zivic, Saddler, SRR, Langford, Moore and Pep had tons of fights so was the vast majority of their opponents not so good that it made it easier to fight so often? People often argue the quality has dropped, the numbers of participants in pro boxing certainly has but are guys today actually stronger and therefore their bodies are broken quicker?

Of course like any debate there will be exceptions. We have Canelo today who is 32 years old and has had 63 fights but the general consensus is he isn't the fighter he used be. When you consider he probably has the best training team and facilities any fighter could wish for, the fact is it would be unlikely his body could cope with having numerous fights a year, even if if wanted to. So if Canelo with advantages he often has over opponents in terms of contracts, weights and the team around him is on the slide how were so many old timers able to be at the top so long? FMM another one who could prepare in the best ways possible, a fighter who never ballooned in weight, rarely took many heavy shots but was still done at 50 fights.

Can you imagine someone like Archie Moore today getting a HW title shot after almost 180 fights at around 40 years of age and then going on to have another 40 fights up to the age of 50? His body must’ve been smashed to pieces after so many fights yet still managed to box at a top level. So how did he do it?

.

Fighters are much stronger now.  Call it strength training methods, PED's,  lab testing of the blood to maximize performance  ... But I find them weaker than they used to be in the boxing heart department and a tad more injury prone. 

Archie Moore would not be a heavyweight today. He be a small cruiser weigh.t

[Bundana]

Fighters are much stronger now.  Call it strength training methods, PED's,  lab testing of the blood to maximize performance  ... But I find them weaker than they used to be in the boxing heart department and a tad more injury prone.

I wonder, what makes you think today's boxers have less heart than the old-timers?

[oogiebe]

Fighters are certinainly stronger and athletically fitter than yesteryear, but not nearly as 'hard,'

The "hard" part... how is it even possible to meassure that?

I'm guessing he meant life was harder in terms of money, opportunities, jobs etc

Exactly. I think Bundana got a bit excited about the 'hard' part.

[elmersalsa]

You also have to look at their ages. Many of these guys had a 100 plus fights, but were not that old.
Only two of Marciano's opponents had 100 plus fights. Moore of course had a ton. Charles has 122. However, he was a great defensive fighter. He had serious health problems that may have had something to do with boxing. Walcott had 72. Louis has 71. Layne had 70. La Starza had 66. Marciano himself had 49.

Cleveland Williams had 97 fights. Zora Folley had 96. Chuvalo had 93. Eddie Machen 64. Patterson had 64.
So no, there wasn't a sudden movement of guys having less fights in the 1960s. No sure where you getting these bizarre conclusions.

Williams, Folley, Machen etc weren’t the best guys in the division in the same way as Louis, Walcott etc were seen as being and most had declined before they retired. Normally post WW2 most fighters are past their best after 40 or so fights. Marciano was fighting Walcott etc when they had numerous fights, Charles was on around 100, Moore around 180, Walcott around 70 etc. Then move onto the 1970s, the golden era for the HW division and the top guys were all pretty much retired, or past their best, after 40-50 fights.

It could be because the salaries/paydays were much larger since the Muhammad Ali era?

[Controversial]

You also have to look at their ages. Many of these guys had a 100 plus fights, but were not that old.
Only two of Marciano's opponents had 100 plus fights. Moore of course had a ton. Charles has 122. However, he was a great defensive fighter. He had serious health problems that may have had something to do with boxing. Walcott had 72. Louis has 71. Layne had 70. La Starza had 66. Marciano himself had 49.

Cleveland Williams had 97 fights. Zora Folley had 96. Chuvalo had 93. Eddie Machen 64. Patterson had 64.
So no, there wasn't a sudden movement of guys having less fights in the 1960s. No sure where you getting these bizarre conclusions.

Williams, Folley, Machen etc weren’t the best guys in the division in the same way as Louis, Walcott etc were seen as being and most had declined before they retired. Normally post WW2 most fighters are past their best after 40 or so fights. Marciano was fighting Walcott etc when they had numerous fights, Charles was on around 100, Moore around 180, Walcott around 70 etc. Then move onto the 1970s, the golden era for the HW division and the top guys were all pretty much retired, or past their best, after 40-50 fights.

It could be because the salaries/paydays were much larger since the Muhammad Ali era?

It's probably a factor, they needed to fight more for financial reasons so more likely to still be fighting out of necessity rather than anything else. I just think it would be unusual for a fighter today to be at the top of their game or challenging for a proper world title with 80+ fights under their belt. Assuming of course they weren't having loads of pre-arranged fights that were more like gloried sparring sessions or fighting guys who fall over whenever they are hit. Always exceptions of course but generally speaking the fighters most people rank in their top 10 after WW2 were on the slide earlier than previous decades.

[p4p1]

I think there is a different kind of strength that people can get from working really physical jobs on a farm, construction, wharfies etc from a young age that was present in people years ago when that was much more common. I don't think modern weights or training can replicate that, nor do I think it needs to. It's just a different kind of strength that can make people heavy handed, really hard to push away/move and feel really solid. It's not explosive but it is just always there no matter the level of fatigue.

[Vic-braz]

Humans are bigger nowdays, at least taller, due to food suply and all that, on the other hand it is weird that some studies show that a decline in testosterone happened in modern eras.

[Vic-braz]

I wonder, what makes you think today's boxers have less heart than the old-timers?

I put my cent on this... If Canelo quits in round 8 in his next fight, he can retire and live like a millionaire today.
Had Benny Leonard done that in his 40th fight, he would be broke.
It is too different, fighters were tougher back then because they HAD TO BE.

I think today fighters (and people really) are too much primadonas too, like everything is about appearence, feelings, social media... that does change the character of a fighter, a fighter shouldn´t care about what others think...
What happened with the silent strong type, like Gary Cooper ?

[Bundana]

I wonder, what makes you think today's boxers have less heart than the old-timers?

I put my cent on this... If Canelo quits in round 8 in his next fight, he can retire and live like a millionaire today.
Had Benny Leonard done that in his 40th fight, he would be broke.
It is too different, fighters were tougher back then because they HAD TO BE.

I think today fighters (and people really) are too much primadonas too, like everything is about appearence, feelings, social media... that does change the character of a fighter, a fighter shouldn´t care about what others think...
What happened with the silent strong type, like Gary Cooper ?

So if Canelo quits in his next fight, it proves that today's fighters lack heart compared to the old-timers... because Benny Leonard didn't quit in his 40th fight? One of the stranger arguments I've read here!

Incidentally, Canelo and Leonard both turned pro at the age of 15. Canelo scored a 4th round stoppage win... while Leonard gave up when he got a bloody nose! What does this tell us about the brave oldtimers vs the modern primadonas, with regards to the heart discussion? Well, absolutely nothing, obviously!

[davie]

I think there is a different kind of strength that people can get from working really physical jobs on a farm, construction, wharfies etc from a young age that was present in people years ago when that was much more common. I don't think modern weights or training can replicate that, nor do I think it needs to. It's just a different kind of strength that can make people heavy handed, really hard to push away/move and feel really solid. It's not explosive but it is just always there no matter the level of fatigue.

I've worked with a few guys who grew up on farms and still tend to crofts and farms in their time off and I agree, these guys are naturally hard and strong individuals.
I've spent time in gyms and lifted weights on and off through my life and worked with guys who throw heavy weights about but the highland farming lads put them to shame for natural strength out on the job a lot of the time and never set foot in a gym.
Some of them are freakishly strong and all seem to have unnaturally large hands as well

[Controversial]

I think there is a different kind of strength that people can get from working really physical jobs on a farm, construction, wharfies etc from a young age that was present in people years ago when that was much more common. I don't think modern weights or training can replicate that, nor do I think it needs to. It's just a different kind of strength that can make people heavy handed, really hard to push away/move and feel really solid. It's not explosive but it is just always there no matter the level of fatigue.

I've worked with a few guys who grew up on farms and still tend to crofts and farms in their time off and I agree, these guys are naturally hard and strong individuals.
I've spent time in gyms and lifted weights on and off through my life and worked with guys who throw heavy weights about but the highland farming lads put them to shame for natural strength out on the job a lot of the time and never set foot in a gym.
Some of them are freakishly strong and all seem to have unnaturally large hands as well

I remember years ago there was a farmer from the UK and if memory serves me right he hadn’t been near a gym in his life but won quite a few strongman contests, he wasn’t young either but just entered one as a laugh and won it so entered a few more over the years. To be fair he was huge!!

[p4p1]

Humans are bigger nowdays, at least taller, due to food suply and all that, on the other hand it is weird that some studies show that a decline in testosterone happened in modern eras.

Probably has a lot to do with the modern lifestyle. We in general are far less physically active than previous generations, our sleeping habits are probably worse due to tablets, tv streaming etc, while we know more about nutrition than ever before, most people diets (including my own) are pretty shit, correct weight aids testosterone as well, we *may* be more stressed compared to previous generations, all of those factors cause lower testosterone. Plus drugs and alcohol as well, but in general, my understanding is that we currently drink less alcohol than many generations before us.