BoxRec

In our discussions, we usually focus on how well the boxer of the past would do in this era, but I'd like to look at it the other way around. The nutrition from then, not now. No PEDs, same day weigh ins, training techniques etc

How do you think Usyk would have faired at heavyweight in the early 70's?

What about Canelo @ 160 in the early 50's?

How would Bivol do in Archie's era?

How about Fury in Reno against Jack Johnson in 1910?

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑02 Apr 2025, 11:57 In our discussions, we usually focus on how well the boxer of the past would do in this era, but I'd like to look at it the other way around. The nutrition from then, not now. No PEDs, same day weigh ins, training techniques etc

How do you think Usyk would have faired at heavyweight in the early 70's?

What about Canelo @ 160 in the early 50's?

How would Bivol do in Archie's era?

How about Fury in Reno against Jack Johnson in 1910?

The nutrition now and then it's like night and day. I don't think that PEDs would make a difference if you ain't got no talent.

Oleksandr Usyk would not be the best in the 70s heavyweight era. He would probably be top 7 at best.

Canelo Alvarez in the 50s era would not be as good. Those guys were very talented. They would teach Canelo a thing or two. Guys like Ellsworth "Spider" Webb, Gene Fullmer, Sugar Ray Robinson (although not as good as in the late 40s decade), Bobo Olson, Florentino Fernandez, Joey Giardello, would have beaten him. Even with PEDs. Put PEDs on those guys and it would have been worse. Canelo was just a great boxer in HIS TIME. Not in that time. The talent between 1950s and 2020s in boxing is like night and day. The guys of the 50s had something extra.

Well, Arthur Bivol could do good in Archie Moore's era. That if we are talking the late part of the 1950s decade. But, if we're talking about the mid to late 40s decade and early 1950s, he would have been in a lot trouble with guys like Ezzard Charles, Jimmy Bivins, Larry Marshall, Joey Maxim, Harold Johnson, and other talented guys. Would he be on top of the crop and like the Cincinnati Cobra Charles? Nope. Those guys were very talented.

Now, Tyson Fury vs Jack Johnson in 1910. The white race (no racism or pun intended), but the behavior of the times would favor Fury. Can Fury fight over 20 rounds? Well, he got better technology. Better nutrition. PEDs. He got everything what the great Jack Johnson didn't had. Fury had all those advantages.

The modern medicine has improved in the last 115 years! No way that Fury would lose that fight. Not in my view. Even though Johnson looked ahead of his time.

It's 277lbs and more for Fury against 215lbs for Johnson full of muscle? Still, Fury wins. Too big. Too tall. And talented.

Usyk would have been in the mix with the top guys. He has a great skill set and would be a great addition to that era. He would come out of it an an ATG as he is today.

Canelo is a little trickier. He has always been the house fighter. He also seemed to suddenly improve his handspeed which you'd have to factor in. But again he's a great butI don't imagine him being as dominant.

Bivol has proved himself one of the very best and I have no doubt this would be the same if he fought in that era or any era. His stock is more likely to go up.

Of course the same day weigh-ins means that Bivol would likely have campainged at HW in the 1950s.

A guy like Bivol wouldn't get near a title fight with the amount of pro fights he has if he fought in the 40's, for instance.

I guess we have to assume that he would have fought a lot kore. doubtful that he would have been as good as Moore, but he would have been in the mix.
Usyk would not have been one of the top contenders in the hw division in the 1970s. He should have been able to have beaten Joshua and Fury much more convincingly. Doesn't seem to have enough power either.
Canelo would have dominated the middleweight division in the early 1950s, but been one of the top contenders. Could see him having the title for a short time.
Johnson was way too skilled for Fury.

My time as a fan for over 40 years has made me come to the conclusion that the top fighters in any era would always be top fighters.

Guys today would compete in different divisions back then due to the weigh-ins.

Mayweather would struggle without his hand injections, his saline drip and the rest. He'd still be great, he just would not have been the best of his era.

The HWs are different. It's completely different division. How much difference there is...that's the question.

Guess I don't believe that a top guy would be a top guy in any era. At any particular time in boxing history at least one division is strong and at least one other is weak. (Of course, others are somewhere in between.) Off of the top of my head, I don't see Vito Antuofermo and Alan Minter being close to the top in many eras.

If you break down certain styles of fighters, you can decipher whether or not they would be competitive in other eras. It’s not just looking at their records. For example when I look at Golovkin with the style he fought behind that jab, I believe he’d be competitive and strong in any era. It’s a style that gives people problems. Alp mentioned Antufermo. His style of boring in like that and getting busted up doesn’t lend itself to dominance in other eras. Canelo, his style of fighting would be competitive in any era but there’s nothing completely outstanding that he does that makes me think he’s gonna beat Charley Burley. And yet he beat Golovkin. Styles make fights.

I remember that the "Old School Fighters" usually ate a steak before a big fight.

I used to be a massive Fury fan, but put him back in Dempsey's era, without the PEDs and he's just a lanky fat bloke with a suspect chin.

Usyk, Canelo, Bivol and Fury would be top fighters in any era

ya, usyk still chasing that legacy of the cruiser goat james toney

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Sep 2021, 10:48

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑29 Sep 2021, 17:39 simple question then

whose cruiser career ranks higher, usyk's or toney?

straight up answer bruh

I rank Toney a little higher. Don't know how much clearer I can be.