For those who say Boxing has "evolved"

[Jimmy2020]

I assess that all sports that aren't e-sports will regress over the next 20 to 30 years. Sport as we know it was a 20th Century thing. Teenagers now have better things to do than punch each other or chase balls on grass while some old guy yells at you to try harder.

This saddens me.

My life has been infinitely better because of Life lessons learned from sport.

Mine too but you and I did jumpers for goalposts and cricket on the park, etc... children don't do that now. They have 'connected devices' to drug them instead.

Also...When I first went to a boxing gym there were no parents there, it was just hard. My first session a professional British Champion was there who made us skip until some of us were sick. I was only a child but it bit me. Nowadays there are more parents than children, white collar keep fitters in the way complaining about ''the kids".

There are still a few gyms out there run by volunteers and people not trying to rip CASC schemes off, or run gyms as a business, but not many.

[Counter-puncher]

Oh I know life is different. I imagine if I travelled the same sporting path again in the modern age I’d find it different, and less enjoyable and rewarding (football is a very different game now also, it suited me rather more back then in several ways)

Still.

[Thomastearns]

I assess that all sports that aren't e-sports will regress over the next 20 to 30 years. Sport as we know it was a 20th Century thing. Teenagers now have better things to do than punch each other or chase balls on grass while some old guy yells at you to try harder.

Unduly pessimistic.

As long as there are sports stars there will be kids who'll want to emulate them. You only have to look at the global reaction to the death of Diego Maradona to see how much sporting heroes still matter.

In any case, boxing is hardly the first choice of sport for most kids, yet more plenty of boys and girls are still willing to try it out.

Let's not forget that for many of the great champions of the past, boxing offered a possible way out of a life of crime and poverty. Those conditions have hardly ceased to exist, even if they are to be now more readily found in different parts of the world.

You only have to look at the tremendous impact that Eastern European boxers have made in the last 20 years. That doesn't look like it's stopping anytime soon, does it?

Human beings are a tough lot, and they have always shown an amazing ability to fight against adversity when the situation calls for it.

I don't see anything changing on that front. I hope it never will.

[lazboy]

A world without combat sports...imagine taking that outlet away from people. We are inherently aggressive and violent.

Although I have to say, those street fighters and violent wife beaters and bullies in general don’t last long in boxing gyms. But that’s why we need boxing gyms. Need to learn the skills to stick up for yourself.

[Lackeos]

IMO, most old timers look like they have sh*t boxing skills, aside from Joe Louis and SRR. Jack Dempsey looks like some dude off the street who's never fought before. If anybody today fought with the same mechanics of Dempsey or Marciano, we would laugh them out of the ring. It's hard to explain how unbelievably blind someone would have to be to look at a fighter like Dempsey and say "Yep. That's perfect technique that totally stands the test of time."

As far as Archie Moore goes, on paper, he's one of the best of all-time. In one of the older boxrec rating formulas, Archie Moore's peak rating was like 5,000, whereas the best current fighters had ratings of like 1,700. On video, Moore's mechanics were really ahead of his time, but still a little suspect, particularly with his hands being pretty low. What's the point of even using Moore as a representative of his era when he fought like a time traveler and his peers didn't?

[brilo33]

Looks like Archie Moore vs Yvonne Durelle in the Black and White video. I've seen that fight.

It's not pointless at all. It's an example that great fighters were great back then too, and could compete with the guys of modern eras.

That's all I'm saying.

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

[Onetimeonly]

Looks like Archie Moore vs Yvonne Durelle in the Black and White video. I've seen that fight.

It's not pointless at all. It's an example that great fighters were great back then too, and could compete with the guys of modern eras.

That's all I'm saying.

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Really? I don't think it's in the vicinity of being better. Miles worse than when I grew up.

[brilo33]

Looks like Archie Moore vs Yvonne Durelle in the Black and White video. I've seen that fight.

It's not pointless at all. It's an example that great fighters were great back then too, and could compete with the guys of modern eras.

That's all I'm saying.

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Really? I don't think it's in the vicinity of being better. Miles worse than when I grew up.

maybe so i go back to early 90s i think the last say 6 7 years we had some really strong divisons good cards like 4 good match ups on 1 card , but like i say the champions back then would be champions now

[gilgamesh]

Looks like Archie Moore vs Yvonne Durelle in the Black and White video. I've seen that fight.

It's not pointless at all. It's an example that great fighters were great back then too, and could compete with the guys of modern eras.

That's all I'm saying.

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Doesn't look that way to me. The competition would be better if you'd eliminate the bullsh*t weight classes for one thing.

[brilo33]

Looks like Archie Moore vs Yvonne Durelle in the Black and White video. I've seen that fight.

It's not pointless at all. It's an example that great fighters were great back then too, and could compete with the guys of modern eras.

That's all I'm saying.

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Doesn't look that way to me. The competition would be better if you'd eliminate the bullsh*t weight classes for one thing.

weight clases aint the real problem though is its, it is getting the best to fight the best in the divisions , this is what really holds boxing back in respect these days

[gilgamesh]

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Doesn't look that way to me. The competition would be better if you'd eliminate the bullsh*t weight classes for one thing.

weight clases aint the real problem though is its, it is getting the best to fight the best in the divisions , this is what really holds boxing back in respect these days

Yeah I'd agree with that.

But the divisions would all be a lot more stacked if all the Jr. divisions were gone. Because then everybody at 140 would be at 147 and 147 would be that much more loaded for it.

You'd still have promotional issues.

If you only had 1 Champion you'd have a lot less bullsh*t of the best not fighting the best too. Because there'd only be 1 Champion and EVERYBODY would want their shot. They'd do business with the Champion whether they promoted him or not because it'd be the only way to get their boy to the top.

Nowadays they can just grab one of the trinkets and pretend their guy is the true Champ, and the other guy is ducking.

It would also force contenders to fight each other more frequently because if there's only 1 Champion then getting a shot is a lot more difficult and you gotta go the extra mile to prove your worth.

[Onetimeonly]

fighters are fighters gil, that dont change especially champions , if anything i would say champions in the bygone era were better as there was 1 belt which means 1 real big paycheque. but i think the overall standard of fighters has got better , there is a lot of competition in every division now

Really? I don't think it's in the vicinity of being better. Miles worse than when I grew up.

maybe so i go back to early 90s i think the last say 6 7 years we had some really strong divisons good cards like 4 good match ups on 1 card , but like i say the champions back then would be champions now

I'm much older, free tv cards with Holmes, Leonard, Tate/Weaver and mustafa/Johnson and guys like hearns and arguello on unreleased undercard.

There's still talent, they just fight so infrequently and so softly coming up.

[brilo33]

Doesn't look that way to me. The competition would be better if you'd eliminate the bullsh*t weight classes for one thing.

weight clases aint the real problem though is its, it is getting the best to fight the best in the divisions , this is what really holds boxing back in respect these days

Yeah I'd agree with that.

But the divisions would all be a lot more stacked if all the Jr. divisions were gone. Because then everybody at 140 would be at 147 and 147 would be that much more loaded for it.

You'd still have promotional issues.

If you only had 1 Champion you'd have a lot less bullsh*t of the best not fighting the best too. Because there'd only be 1 Champion and EVERYBODY would want their shot. They'd do business with the Champion whether they promoted him or not because it'd be the only way to get their boy to the top.

Nowadays they can just grab one of the trinkets and pretend their guy is the true Champ, and the other guy is ducking.

It would also force contenders to fight each other more frequently because if there's only 1 Champion then getting a shot is a lot more difficult and you gotta go the extra mile to prove your worth.

to be honest i wouldnt care if there was 2 titles in a division as long as they had to face of say every September, that rubbish about the losing zeros dont help , as fighters wont risk fights because of it ,Rocky Marciano to blame

[gilgamesh]

weight clases aint the real problem though is its, it is getting the best to fight the best in the divisions , this is what really holds boxing back in respect these days

Yeah I'd agree with that.

But the divisions would all be a lot more stacked if all the Jr. divisions were gone. Because then everybody at 140 would be at 147 and 147 would be that much more loaded for it.

You'd still have promotional issues.

If you only had 1 Champion you'd have a lot less bullsh*t of the best not fighting the best too. Because there'd only be 1 Champion and EVERYBODY would want their shot. They'd do business with the Champion whether they promoted him or not because it'd be the only way to get their boy to the top.

Nowadays they can just grab one of the trinkets and pretend their guy is the true Champ, and the other guy is ducking.

It would also force contenders to fight each other more frequently because if there's only 1 Champion then getting a shot is a lot more difficult and you gotta go the extra mile to prove your worth.

to be honest i wouldnt care if there was 2 titles in a division as long as they had to face of say every September, that rubbish about the losing zeros dont help , as fighters wont risk fights because of it ,Rocky Marciano to blame

2 Titles is 1 too many.

I've basically come to the point that Belt or no Belt. There's the #1 guy, and there's everyone else. I call lesser "Champions" what they are. A contender with a belt.

[brilo33]

Yeah I'd agree with that.

But the divisions would all be a lot more stacked if all the Jr. divisions were gone. Because then everybody at 140 would be at 147 and 147 would be that much more loaded for it.

You'd still have promotional issues.

If you only had 1 Champion you'd have a lot less bullsh*t of the best not fighting the best too. Because there'd only be 1 Champion and EVERYBODY would want their shot. They'd do business with the Champion whether they promoted him or not because it'd be the only way to get their boy to the top.

Nowadays they can just grab one of the trinkets and pretend their guy is the true Champ, and the other guy is ducking.

It would also force contenders to fight each other more frequently because if there's only 1 Champion then getting a shot is a lot more difficult and you gotta go the extra mile to prove your worth.

to be honest i wouldnt care if there was 2 titles in a division as long as they had to face of say every September, that rubbish about the losing zeros dont help , as fighters wont risk fights because of it ,Rocky Marciano to blame

2 Titles is 1 too many.

I've basically come to the point that Belt or no Belt. There's the #1 guy, and there's everyone else. I call lesser "Champions" what they are. A contender with a belt.

youre hard core , you must of had it growing up there was always a couple of kids in school that never fought each other, the harest kids ,

[gilgamesh]

Not really

[brilo33]

Not really

not saying its a bad thing mate

[gilgamesh]

I'm just saying it didn't happen. For one thing I don't really recall anybody in school being considered THE BADASS. We had a few guys that you didn't wanna f*ck with, but fights didn't break out often enough to establish a far and away badass.

[Onetimeonly]

Really? I had at least 50 fights before I was 10. Baltimore is a special shithole though.

[gilgamesh]

Really? I had at least 50 fights before I was 10. Baltimore is a special shithole though.

I had about a dozen fights all through my school days. I mean until I was done.

I've had about 8 more in the years since.

Unless you count sparring, which I don't.

[Onetimeonly]

Really? I had at least 50 fights before I was 10. Baltimore is a special shithole though.

I had about a dozen fights all through my school days. I mean until I was done.

I've had about 8 more in the years since.

Unless you count sparring, which I don't.

Nah just street/school. Shocking as it may sound, I was a bit of a bully at times in my youth. Nothing I'm proud of. When I was 9 I broke a kids nose, then his 11 year old brother came and I broke his nose, same with the 13 year old.

[brilo33]

nah you people are normal. i had double figure fights before i left primary school i had a fight with a somail kid last whole break time then i had to fight his brother ., secondry was so gang orientated you couldnt have fights of the cuffs unless they were not gang tied

[Tony1244]

We've gone over that less people box and less people are disciplined.

No, we haven't.

Boxing might be a less popular sport in the US, but one could easily that pro boxing is far more popular around the globe than it was twenty years ago, hence the emergence of Eastern European and Asian fighters.

And they seem pretty disciplined to me... barring Sergey Kovalev and Kubrat Pulev's out-of-ring shenanigans.

I thought the test score analogy was obvious. If people are less disciplined, and they are, it will counter both mental and physical advancement.

But you're assuming that people's approaches to academia are the same as their chosen profession, which I have to disagree with.

And I don't believe that fighters are less disciplined today than they were yesteryear, hence the reason why I feel you're suffering from "rosy retrospection".

It seems you have the automated knee-jerk compulsion to judge the past disproportionately more positively than you judge the present.

"Nothing today is quite like the good ole days?"

Many things are far better now when they were then. I don't agree with what you put in bold.

[gilgamesh]

I mean hell the Good 'ol days for me are 2002 and 2003, and I don't think Boxing is even as good as it was then. I can easily imagine Boxing being superior than it was then well before that.

Of the years I've followed the sport in real time. The worst single years have all been from the last 6 or 7 years. Last year and 2016 being among the absolute worst.

Now in good news. If Covid gets completely done away with, and Live crowds come back, there's almost no way 2021 can't be a better year for Boxing than 2020 was. So at least we got that to look forward to.

But I mean think of this.

Crawford vs Spence has been THE FIGHT at Welterweight for how long now?

Joshua vs Fury or Joshua vs Wilder has been a fight people have wanted to see for how long now?

In 1970 and 1971 people wanted Ali vs Frazier more than anything. Ali after a 3 year hiatus comes back in late 1970, fights 2 tuneups, and is in the ring with Joe Frazier within a 6 month span.

The sport just doesn't work like that anymore.

[oogiebe]

If punch output is considered, then boxing has DE-volved.