Does the truth about old fighters lie in the middle??

I guess I'm biased towards the modern fighters and I think with good cause as I think Boxing like in other sports move on...get better, more sophisticated, more professional!!!...For me a modern day Mike Tyson wipes out everyone from John L to Louis because watching the old fighters you see how basic they really are...

I believe that because these guys are from the past and from a romantic age they are overrated by some of the folks on here. The past is always better than it is now theory etc.....With no real proof.. people can believe the old scribes who can't appreciate the present....Arcel didn't rate ali etc....Pep won a round without landing a punch cobblers!!!!

However and it is a big one....These guys were greats of their eras which means they had talent and the ability to adapt to the fighters of their time!!!! Which means with the Coaching, nutrition available today they just may have been as good as the greats of this era...Form is temporary..Class is permanent etc etc....

If we are posting matchups from the past ..ie Tyson-Dempsey and who will win... then guys like me will always pick the Tyson's because I'm picking on what I see..however in all probability Tyson would be fighting a different animal in a MODERN D3mpsey...

Think the oldies are Overrated by some and Underrated by guys like me.....

Think the truth lies somewhere in the middle!!!

You have to judge them relative to their time truss for all those things mentioned, we're bigger have better diets, training etc.

In terms of inherent bias, I think your average guy is a bit nostalgic and favours the fighters of their youth, like the music of their youth.

In your analogy, tyson would walk through dempsey in seconds for me, but with the dempsey of today it would be different. Although, personally as Dempsey was the hyped tyson of his day imo, i don't rate either of them that highly historically.

Amen to that, milkyboy. Shades of opinion and fact are very rarely black and white; it's as well to have a shade of grey ready for the myriad times that the definite answer isn't appropriate. The truth lies somewhere in the middle in most walks of life, not just boxing.

Milkyboy, if you get a moment, you couldn't favour us with your opinions on the "606 Hall of Fame, could you?" Like to hear what you have to say on an interesting quintet.

Promoting his own threads on mine.....

Should be a banning offence..

Guilty as charged, although I did at least do so after answering the premise of your thread, Truss. No offence intended, of course....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Promoting his own threads on mine.....

Should be a banning offence..

Despicable behaviour.

https://www.606v2.com/t7986-union-cane-s-prediction-league-week-two-entries-in-by-1700-please

Of course...I've added my choices even though they weren't asked for

I've already asked you for yours before; it goes without saying that I'd like your input too, but I don't want to nag you for them every week. You know where the thread is, after all!

Anybody else want to advertise on my thread.....Very cost efficient..

o2, Sainsbury's. Halifax....Now you've left the NOW have a think about it! 8)

Sigh

How good could've SRR been with all these modern nutrition techniques and other rubbish? He'd smack the rudey poo out of any welter from the last 25 years and might lose 2 times out of 100.

Guys like Ali etc didn't have scientific methods yet that's regarded as the best heavyweight era we've ever had, they didn't have much different than 30 years etc previous other than the sport had evolved in terms of format and number of times they were fighting per year. In summary it still involved whacking one another.

And whilst on free promoting.

www.trussisanignorantcurrymuncher.com

And another insightful read:

www.trusshasabumboycalledgeniusofpbfwhichspeaksvolumes.com

Fabulous reads!

Predictable as ever Coxy..

Sure someone somewhere appreciates you though.....

coxy0001 wrote:Sigh

How good could've SRR been with all these modern nutrition techniques and other rubbish? He'd smack the rudey poo out of any welter from the last 25 years and might lose 2 times out of 100.

Guys like Ali etc didn't have scientific methods yet that's regarded as the best heavyweight era we've ever had, they didn't have much different than 30 years etc previous other than the sport had evolved in terms of format and number of times they were fighting per year. In summary it still involved whacking one another.

And whilst on free promoting.

www.trussisanignorantcurrymuncher.com

And another insightful read:

www.trusshasabumboycalledgeniusofpbfwhichspeaksvolumes.com

Fabulous reads!

I got some better websites coxy

www.Coxyknowsjackaboutboxingandjustreadsboxrec.com

www.coxybumsbaltimoraafterunloadinghislittlewieneroverd4.com

www.mysticcoxygoesbankruptafterpredictingwronglybigfights.com

You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

I have to say milkyboy, 'tyson would walk through dempsey in seconds' is a hell of a statement to make. You really think we have come so far?

I agree with the general sentiment though.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Truss, you have pretty much answered your own question so there is not that much to add, other than to say the heavyweight division is a bit of an anomaly in that modern nutrition and the "advantages" that this brings, whatever they may be, have clearly come to a grinding halt. Even Haye and Klitschko, who look impressive, have limited stamina and underneath them there are so many fighters who are just simply not up to standard in terms of conditioning. The ability to fight, and fight hard, for the duration of a match is something that, to my eyes, has decreased in the heavyweight division at least. Not to mention the skill levels. I guess it is symptomatic of the times, with less fights and a lack of talent in the division meaning stamina becomes less imperative, but it is something that should be acknowledged.

I am no expert at all on mordern nutrition and sports science, but I always think back to something Clive Woodward said after the World Cup in 2003. I am paraphrasing but he was saying, in relation to sports science, that rather than improving one thing by 100%, his backroom staff, dietitians, vision coaches etc etc were tasked with improving 100 things by 1%. I guess this argument is probably applicable to noxing as well.

You could have a point Tino...

As for the article there is some truth about favouring old timers over the modern guys on a regular basis...Some of the greats in this era get overlooked like Mayweather, Jones Jr, Hopkins etc

The genius of PBF wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Sadly you two don't seem to intepret the "wink" smilie as such that i was being sarcastic.

And god forbid i actually comment on boxing without going on wums like you do. So therefore i apologise for getting involved in debates about boxing .

And did i get voted off? I seem to remember it was "vote 1* for blah blah blah", which was such a brilliant way of doing things with the good old 1* brigade.

Can you remind me how many people welcomed your return? I seem to remember general consensus being "who let this idiot back on" - you're the one with the JOKE reputation.

And don't bother replying, i'm done with you for today.

You didn't offer much of an opinion did you...

Sarcasm is all you offer these days....go and ruin some other threads with your original brand of it..

joeyjojo618 wrote:I have to say milkyboy, 'tyson would walk through dempsey in seconds' is a hell of a statement to make. You really think we have come so far?

I agree with the general sentiment though.

i am prone to the odd sweeping statement joey! In this case its based on the fact that my view is that dempsey was the beckham of his day. Loved by the press and the public but what did he really do to warrant the standing he's held in? He was an exciting fighter but way way too small to mix it with any modern heavy, and especially a wrecking ball like tyson. Seconds is probably a bit harsh though!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Predictable as ever Coxy..

Sure someone somewhere appreciates you though.....

Thanks for coming back to my points with a reasoned and well thought out counter reply Truss.

You wonder why people have a go when all you have is little one liners, like you're attempting to be funny or something. I know you struggle with paragraphs so here goes:

There is no new technique to hitting someone

There is no new secret to avoiding punches

And modern nutrition? Guys like the Human Windmill were used to fighting 12+ rounds with ease, yet there are modern guys who gas during the championship rounds in the modern 12 round era.

I'm just disecting your arguement, but seeing as though you don't seem to understand the word "debate" i may as well go searching elsewhere.

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Sadly you two don't seem to intepret the "wink" smilie as such that i was being sarcastic.

And god forbid i actually comment on boxing without going on wums like you do. So therefore i apologise for getting involved in debates about boxing .

And did i get voted off? I seem to remember it was "vote 1* for blah blah blah", which was such a brilliant way of doing things with the good old 1* brigade.

Can you remind me how many people welcomed your return? I seem to remember general consensus being "who let this idiot back on" - you're the one with the JOKE reputation.

And don't bother replying, i'm done with you for today.

You go on 606 looking for fights now that D4 is not around at the moment for you to harass and stalk it looks like me and Truss are your new target...thought you said you didn't see the thread but you know how the voting went?

I couldn't careless about what the likes of sugar boy and a few others think you got voted off and ridiculed because everyone got sick off you. Your the one with the joke reputation not me...the general consensus was everyone wanted you to leave 606.

DEmpsey's record as Champion does show a lack of quality opposition....

Tyson and Tunney's careers do mirror eachother do a certain extent..

Tyson lost to the best fighter he ever fought in Holy and Dempsey in Tunney..

Both beat middling opposition..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You didn't offer much of an opinion did you...

Sarcasm is all you offer these days....go and ruin some other threads with your original brand of it..

Do you want to read my original post? I made some pretty valid points based on my opinion and i've done the same above.

Look, i know you're a simple kinda guy but at least read what i've ruddy written and come back with a counter arguement rather than make pathetic little sniping comments. At least my sniping comments are amongst something actually inbetween points to do with the thread.

Chill out Coxy..I was only being sarcastic hence the wink..

Tyson's record is nothing special if you look at it dispassionately and subjectively.

This thread is in need of some 'red ink' methinks...

coxy0001 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You didn't offer much of an opinion did you...

Sarcasm is all you offer these days....go and ruin some other threads with your original brand of it..

Do you want to read my original post? I made some pretty valid points based on my opinion and i've done the same above.

Look, i know you're a simple kinda guy but at least read what i've ruddy written and come back with a counter arguement rather than make pathetic little sniping comments. At least my sniping comments are amongst something actually inbetween points to do with the thread.

It's okay coxy comeback later on and blame it on being drunk.

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Sadly you two don't seem to intepret the "wink" smilie as such that i was being sarcastic.

And god forbid i actually comment on boxing without going on wums like you do. So therefore i apologise for getting involved in debates about boxing .

And did i get voted off? I seem to remember it was "vote 1* for blah blah blah", which was such a brilliant way of doing things with the good old 1* brigade.

Can you remind me how many people welcomed your return? I seem to remember general consensus being "who let this idiot back on" - you're the one with the JOKE reputation.

And don't bother replying, i'm done with you for today.

You go on 606 looking for fights now that D4 is not around at the moment for you to harass and stalk it looks like me and Truss are your new target...thought you said you didn't see the thread but you know how the voting went?

I couldn't careless about what the likes of sugar boy and a few others think you got voted off and ridiculed because everyone got sick off you. Your the one with the joke reputation not me...the general consensus was everyone wanted you to leave 606.

Bit weird how i get along with most though isn't it? It's just you i have an issue with, and do you want to know why? Because you were banned 3 times from the old 606 for calling me a "Child Catcher".

And dear me, someone informed me of the thread. God forbid someone brought it up with the "oh some twonk did a 1* vote". I couldn't care less, i'm not the one who's been banned 4 times from 2 sites and is generally considered a disgrace to the forums. You got booted off here because a number of posters complained about you, those same posts and more complained when you were allowed to come back. Don't see many complaining about me being here.

Trot on little lad, you'll be banned again soon enough don't worry.

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You didn't offer much of an opinion did you...

Sarcasm is all you offer these days....go and ruin some other threads with your original brand of it..

Do you want to read my original post? I made some pretty valid points based on my opinion and i've done the same above.

Look, i know you're a simple kinda guy but at least read what i've ruddy written and come back with a counter arguement rather than make pathetic little sniping comments. At least my sniping comments are amongst something actually inbetween points to do with the thread.

It's okay coxy comeback later on and blame it on being drunk.

You've been reported, have a nice day.

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You didn't offer much of an opinion did you...

Sarcasm is all you offer these days....go and ruin some other threads with your original brand of it..

Do you want to read my original post? I made some pretty valid points based on my opinion and i've done the same above.

Look, i know you're a simple kinda guy but at least read what i've ruddy written and come back with a counter arguement rather than make pathetic little sniping comments. At least my sniping comments are amongst something actually inbetween points to do with the thread.

It's okay coxy comeback later on and blame it on being drunk.

You've been reported, have a nice day.

The mods can see the thread with you starting it for no reason...will report you back

And back to thread, some of us want to talk boxing.

Naturally there will be modern that beats old and vice a versa, but i remember some making an arguement that an average modern day boxer (say Dawson) takes out a top 10 old school boxer i.e. Tunney.

The big problem we have in even deciding a "middle" ground is that this isn't the 100m etc - there has been a continual evolvment of the format. From umpteen rounds, to 15 and now to 12 - the difference inbetween these changes we cannot ignore and is what makes a comparison between a current fighter and one who fought 80 years ago nigh on impossible.

That's my impartial trade off arguement anyway and one that gets too easily forgotten

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Sadly you two don't seem to intepret the "wink" smilie as such that i was being sarcastic.

And god forbid i actually comment on boxing without going on wums like you do. So therefore i apologise for getting involved in debates about boxing .

And did i get voted off? I seem to remember it was "vote 1* for blah blah blah", which was such a brilliant way of doing things with the good old 1* brigade.

Can you remind me how many people welcomed your return? I seem to remember general consensus being "who let this idiot back on" - you're the one with the JOKE reputation.

And don't bother replying, i'm done with you for today.

You go on 606 looking for fights now that D4 is not around at the moment for you to harass and stalk it looks like me and Truss are your new target...thought you said you didn't see the thread but you know how the voting went?

I couldn't careless about what the likes of sugar boy and a few others think you got voted off and ridiculed because everyone got sick off you. Your the one with the joke reputation not me...the general consensus was everyone wanted you to leave 606.

Bit weird how i get along with most though isn't it? It's just you i have an issue with, and do you want to know why? Because you were banned 3 times from the old 606 for calling me a "Child Catcher".

And dear me, someone informed me of the thread. God forbid someone brought it up with the "oh some twonk did a 1* vote". I couldn't care less, i'm not the one who's been banned 4 times from 2 sites and is generally considered a disgrace to the forums. You got booted off here because a number of posters complained about you, those same posts and more complained when you were allowed to come back. Don't see many complaining about me being here.

Trot on little lad, you'll be banned again soon enough don't worry.

Not really you get into fights with posters who dont share the same opinion...you insult posters on a regular basis your time for a ban is coming as well.

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You ever met that guy at work that acts like Jack the lad, thinks he's funny and popular......Yet everybody thinks he's a jerk PBF???

It's Coxy...

Delusional Truss acts as if he is a respected poster like windy and the captain...there is a reason why coxy got voted off the bbc 606

Has a pop at me and you for no reason

Sadly you two don't seem to intepret the "wink" smilie as such that i was being sarcastic.

And god forbid i actually comment on boxing without going on wums like you do. So therefore i apologise for getting involved in debates about boxing .

And did i get voted off? I seem to remember it was "vote 1* for blah blah blah", which was such a brilliant way of doing things with the good old 1* brigade.

Can you remind me how many people welcomed your return? I seem to remember general consensus being "who let this idiot back on" - you're the one with the JOKE reputation.

And don't bother replying, i'm done with you for today.

You go on 606 looking for fights now that D4 is not around at the moment for you to harass and stalk it looks like me and Truss are your new target...thought you said you didn't see the thread but you know how the voting went?

I couldn't careless about what the likes of sugar boy and a few others think you got voted off and ridiculed because everyone got sick off you. Your the one with the joke reputation not me...the general consensus was everyone wanted you to leave 606.

Bit weird how i get along with most though isn't it? It's just you i have an issue with, and do you want to know why? Because you were banned 3 times from the old 606 for calling me a "Child Catcher".

And dear me, someone informed me of the thread. God forbid someone brought it up with the "oh some twonk did a 1* vote". I couldn't care less, i'm not the one who's been banned 4 times from 2 sites and is generally considered a disgrace to the forums. You got booted off here because a number of posters complained about you, those same posts and more complained when you were allowed to come back. Don't see many complaining about me being here.

Trot on little lad, you'll be banned again soon enough don't worry.

Not really you get into fights with posters who dont share the same opinion...you insult posters on a regular basis your time for a ban is coming as well.

That's called having a debate.

Don't worry sunshine, i'm sure your previous ban will stand you in good stead. Stop stalking me and other posters now, it's been highlighted and it won't do you any favours coming back to me with another sniping reply.

Anyone care to debate boxing aka my above point about comparisons due to format changes?

Thanks

coxy

Nobody is interested lads, perhaps you could carry this on via the medium of private messaging?

Union, simply quote one of my boxing comments and we'll get back on track.

Just ruin my thread Coxy............

I don't mind..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Just ruin my thread Coxy............

I don't mind..

Perhaps you could reply to one of my boxing related points Truss, no offence buddy but you haven't done so.. so far

Ok it's back open, let the (sensible) debate resume!

As someone often, probably fairly accused of favouring the old timers should perhaps clear up a myth often held in that folk such as myself don't think any modern fighter is any good. This is simply not the case have always maintained the true cream such as Manny and Floyd are competitive in any era, because as many have rightly said talent is talent and tends to flourish irrespective of era or environment.

However where I do feel the older era has a strength over the modern is in the depth of the talent pool. To run with the Manny and Floyd example they are decent fighters but who below 17 does anyone give even a 30% chance against them? Now is that because they are supermen or because the fighters below them in the rankings are a pretty weak bunch, for me it is the latter. Should add don't particularly feel this is the fighters fault. For me modern fighters do not fight often enough and on the way up are matched much too easily to really learn their trade. In my opinion all the gym work in the world is no substitute for actual in the ring work with a decent or well schooled opponent.

Would also add that whilst it is true that many of us may overrate old timers the same is true of many with modern fighters and Azania's statement that Jeffries would not last two rounds with Herbie Hide is as daft a comment as has ever been made on the sport on this or any other forum.

rowley wrote:Would also add that whilst it is true that many of us may overrate old timers the same is true of many with modern fighters and Azania's statement that Jeffries would not last two rounds with Herbie Hide is as daft a comment as has ever been made on the sport on this or any other forum.

If only.

Too true Scott, the sad thing is it's probably not in the top ten.

coxy0001 wrote:From umpteen rounds, to 15 and now to 12 - the difference inbetween these changes we cannot ignore and is what makes a comparison between a current fighter and one who fought 80 years ago nigh on impossible.

I think that's about the gist of it. I tire of the endless old vs new arguments because there are simply so many variables that a totally accurate comparison and assessment just can't be done. All we can offer are probabilities, and we all know too well that in this sport-more than in many others-one split-second can change the outcome of a fight.

In football (or 'soccer') a moment's lapse can mean the 'better' team conceding a goal, but that can be equalised. In boxing it means you're on your back being counted out.

This is a lot of para phrasing on my part and done mostly from memory, so apologies for this up front.

There is theory around heredity learning i.e. it may take 100's of years to learn something new first time, but after this the time gets shorter. Whether this is really passed down in genes or just us lot getting better at teaching once we fully understand something, is debatable. Subjects that used to be taught to university students fifty years ago are now common place for A levels. For me, the same goes for sport. We rarely go back in sport and, if we do, it is normally due to moving the goal posts. Therefore, I am definitely in the class wins out camp here, although this isn't surprising as I am get older!!

Scottrf wrote:

rowley wrote:Would also add that whilst it is true that many of us may overrate old timers the same is true of many with modern fighters and Azania's statement that Jeffries would not last two rounds with Herbie Hide is as daft a comment as has ever been made on the sport on this or any other forum.

If only.

I thought his 50 fighters who batter Rocky Marciano was up there.

Especially as it included people he beat.

To be honest Ox only got about 10 names into it, think I saw the name of Tyson Fury or some such nonsense and went for a fag instead.

rowley wrote:. For me modern fighters do not fight often enough and on the way up are matched much too easily to really learn their trade.

.

What is their trade though?

We live in an era where boxing is a global sport with an instant audience. The rewards are there IF you entertain. Stink the place ut with a defensive display and the public switch off and the best find an excuse not to fight you because you "couldn't draw flies".

The pressure to fight face first is greater now than ever before in front of the ADHD generation.

Yes, I know Floyd and Hopkins are masters of their trade, but both were originally exciting boxer-punchers when they first stepped onto the world scene.

bhb001 wrote:There is theory around heredity learning i.e. it may take 100's of years to learn something new first time, but after this the time gets shorter. Whether this is really passed down in genes or just us lot getting better at teaching once we fully understand something, is debatable. Subjects that used to be taught to university students fifty years ago are now common place for A levels. For me, the same goes for sport. We rarely go back in sport and, if we do, it is normally due to moving the goal posts. Therefore, I am definitely in the class wins out camp here, although this isn't surprising as I am get older!!

It cannot be genetic unless the people who knew "the new stuff" had more offspring. Even then it could be explained without genetics.

Personally, I think people don't know more, they just know different. If you sit today's Maths graduates down in front of an 'O' level paper from the 1950's they will struggle to cope.

Anyway the definitive factor for me is that boxing's participation is down. With a smaller talent pool, standards drop. Consider the case where there is only 1000 professional boxers left. Will they still be able to bash up Joe Louis ?

Football and athletics have progressed, no doubt, but they are global behemoths and are participated in by every school kid in the Western World. Boxing is a dying minority sport - you can still get Olympic tickets for it if you like !!

fearlessBamber wrote:Anyway the definitive factor for me is that boxing's participation is down. With a smaller talent pool, standards drop. Consider the case where there is only 1000 professional boxers left. Will they still be able to bash up Joe Louis ?

Of course, he struggled to hit a speed ball.