BoxRec

lost of old timers say that fighters today arnt as good as they used to be is that true or is it the trainners that arnt as good as they used to be after all you can only do something as good as youve learnt

Everybody thinks their generation is the best. Histories greatest fighters are spread over all generations. The Sport isn't as good as it used to be. High purses have allowed guys to fight once or twice a year instead of double digit outings. A ridiculous number of titles are out there and the clown org's pick and choose bums to fight for them. that being said, a high number of outstanding fights and fighters are still out there.

More fights against other elite competition makes it much easier to rank guys in an all time sense. But it doesn't mean that Evander Holyfield or Shane Mosley would be gate keepers in the 30's or the 70's.

It's just more of a niche sport now. I'm fine with that.

When I was a kid, I remember my Dad and Grandpa having a friendly argument over who was the greatest heavyweight. My dad said Joe Louis. My grandpa said Jack Dempsey. When it was over (they agreed to disagree), I remember my grandpa remarking that he recalled having a similar discussion with his Dad, who naturally felt John L. Sullivan was the greatest.

Well I wasn't alive in the 1920s-40s, but I believe that was definitely the deepest and greatest era of boxing in history. The sport has declined drastically in the past 30 years. I still love boxing, but the wide majority of talent is in the lower weight classes. Only a handful of fighters today could have been elite fighters in older, deeper eras.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Everybody thinks their generation is the best. Histories greatest fighters are spread over all generations. The Sport isn't as good as it used to be. High purses have allowed guys to fight once or twice a year instead of double digit outings. A ridiculous number of titles are out there and the clown org's pick and choose bums to fight for them. that being said, a high number of outstanding fights and fighters are still out there.

More fights against other elite competition makes it much easier to rank guys in an all time sense. But it doesn't mean that Evander Holyfield or Shane Mosley would be gate keepers in the 30's or the 70's.

It's just more of a niche sport now. I'm fine with that.

We'll be hard-pressed to produce a better post on this subject than you'll find right here. Well-put.

i was making the point that fighters are just as good but the trainners may have declined over the decades

but saads responce is good

I'm okay with the basic sentiment of what Saad is saying. Holyfield and Moseley would be top fighters in any era.

Some eras are obviously better than others.

I think that certain eras have produced more great fighters than other eras. And it is competition which drives individualsd on to achieve bigger and better things.

I think that all weight classes had a much more robust collection of fighters, and back in "the day" fighters fought almost once a month.They truley paved the way for today's collection. If you research some of the records( Franz Szuzina for instance) (obvious choice for me), it holds true.With a calliber of fighters such as Virgil Akins, Randy Sandy, Spider Webb, Charlie Cotton & Joey Giardello etc....ln the case of my father who had the WORST management and trainers one could question......does the fighter make the trainer.....hmmmm....back then yes.

I wouldn't blame the trainers, although they also can get lazy from the massive amounts of money(cough, yeah manny, that's you).

Amateur Boxing is a joke now, in the old days guys would fight so often they would learn on the job without an amateur back ground. Another thing is the weight hikes with infrequent bouts. A good deal of camp is shedding excess pounds because of ballooning in between fights and day before weigh ins. Back then it was fight, straight back to the gym. Way more time to work on fundamentals. I think it was Tommy Loughran who hated training, so they just booked another fight.

It's so difficult to compare eras. But one of my all time favorite fighters is erik Morales, I think he would have been even better in the old days, fighting 12 times or so a year would have been great for him imo.

The best part about years past is a loss didn't mean you sucked. The fans were much better, LOL.

Giardello hated training too....but let's face it , if you fought once a month...that's a lot of training in of itself....let's not forget the gloves were only what....6 ounces?????