BoxRec

Thought this would be interesting. I’m sure most people have noticed that modern champions and contenders almost always have pretty win/loss records. Take a look a top 10 list and you will see plenty of guys going 25-0 or 35-1 or something like that. You seldom see that when looking at fighters from way back. Most have several more losses.
So I went through Ring Magazines Annual Ratings for 1935, 1955, 1975, 1995, and 2015. I randomly picked the middleweight division. I added up the win/loss records for the Champion and the Top 10. Then I averaged it out.

After rounding off, here is what the average record of the contenders and the champion for each year:

1935 61-11-4 (61 wins, 11 losses, 4 draws)
1955 63-10-3 (63 wins, 10 losses 3 draws)
1975 47-5-2 (47 wins, 5 losses, 2 draws)
1995 36-2 (36 wins, 2 losses, most fighters had zero draws.)
2015 31-1 (31 wins, 1 loss, most fighters had zero draws)

Notice how the records for 1935 are almost identical, but then there has been a sizable change.

Thought this would interesting discuss why the records are so different. These are after all, the best fighters of each time.

Money is the main reason. Fighters of today make substantially more. They don't need to fight 5 or 6 times a year

^^ This

Money has changed the sport. Its easier to sell a big fight with two unbeaten fighters than it would be if they both had been beaten numerous times. So the sport isn't better really as guys swerve the hard fights and look cash out on a title shot.

I think you guys are on to something; just wanted to expand on it.

I think a lot of it has to do with multiple "champions"
In 1935 and 1955, there were only one champion. Therefore, to get a title shot, you had to beat quality competition to establish yourself as the top contender and get a title shot. Outside of title shots, the biggest ways to make $ was to fight another contender. Therefore, there were a lot fights between the Top 10 fights and there fore guys piled up the losses.

By 1975, there were two titles, and you started to see less fights between the contenders, since there were now more opportunities for title fights.

By 1995, there were four titles. It is simply too risky to fight another contender and risk a loss. The pretty win/loss records against weak competition could now get you a title shot. That simply didn't happen way back.

It is important to realize that a fighter with 10 losses way back was probably better than a guy with 10 losses now.

Actually thought there would be interest in this topic.