# This era is pretty weak



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Yeah I know this is obvious to some, but I feel the need to vent about it. The most recent realization came after May 2nd. Mayweather outclassed the number 2 p4p fighter in the world (depending on how and if you rate Ward), and proved he's the best of this generation. There were a few consequences of that though. A 38 year old man is the lineal champion at 147 and 154 and he holds 5 of the 8 major belts at both of those divisions. Now everybody thinks he's in a class of his own and nobody can defeat him 154 and below. If nobody steps up in the next 4 years, Mayweather could possibly become the fighter of the decade of the 2010-2019 years. The sad thing is that this current Mayweather is nowhere near his peak.

Mayweather in the past before the constant hand issue and the slower reflexes was a different animal. How would you imagine a fight between a 5'10 power puncher and Mayweather nowadays? 





But let's not focus on Mayweather. Lets look at the rest of the p4p list

Mayweather 38
Wladimir Klitshko 39
Roman Gonzalez 26
Guillermo Rigondeaux 34
Manny Pacquiao 36
Carl Froch 37
Gennady Golovkin 33
Sergey Kovalev 32
Timothy Bradley 31
Juan Manuel Marquez 41
Avg: 34.7

Now you can say that sports science, less frequent fights and nutrition has let fighters fight on longer. Could another theory be that these fighters who were brought up from a different era are just that more superior that they're able to still dominate their competition despite being deteriorated. How is it that Bernard Hopkins who competed in the same era as James Toney and prime Roy Jones is still able to win titles at 49 in today's era?

I recently watched Sugar Ray Leonard vs Terry Norris and at the age of 34, Leonard didn't look that bad. He still had really good handspeed and still a capable fighter. I would pick that Leonard to still beat many fighters at 154 today. Terry Norris beat the shit out of him though and made him look like an old man. Norris was 23 years old at the time. Flip back to now, and we have 34 year old Mayweather dominating 24 year old Ortiz, and a 36 year old Mayweather schooling 23 year old Canelo. I won't even touch on what Hopkins has done.

Speaking of Norris, lets look at the p4p list after his fight with Leonard*

Julio Cesar Chavez 30
Pernell Whitaker 28
Terry Norris 25
Orlando Canizales 27
Buddy McGirt 28
Riddick Bowe 25
Azumah Nelson 34
Sung-Kil Moon 29
Julian Jackson 32
James Toney 24
Avg: 28.1

The obvious thing here is the average fighter on the list being 6.6 years younger, but lets also examine the fighters list. Chavez is at the top of it, but near the tail end of his run. Then there is Pernell in his prime, Norris at his peak, etc. You don't have guys like Mayweather and Wladmir well past their primes who have nobody left to challenge them. You think I'm being too cynical or didn't use enough examples? I'll show you the list 10 years before Leonard vs Norris.

Thomas Hearns 23
Sugar Ray Leonard 25
Marvin Hagler 27
Larry Holmes 32
Alexis Arguello 29
Wilfredo Gomez 25
Eddie Mustafa Muhammad 29
Matt Saad Muhammmad 27
Wilfred Benitez 23
Roberto Duran 30 Aaron Pryor 26 (tie)
AVG: 26.8

You can say that every fighter on that list is an atg in their weight class. Their super fight back then was like Errol Spence vs Canelo instead of Mayweather vs Pacquiao. Are the fighters in our current and next generation not good enough to overcome the skill and experience of the previous generations despite their aging reflexes and slowing legs, or has sports science really caught up that much? Maybe this can explain why there hasn't been much torch passing in this ear @Bogotazo










*1992 version since 91 version isn't available


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

A huge difference for me, is that the younger fighters you mentioned like Terry Norris, had great skill sets, craft. The reason Mayweather can beat guys like Ortiz and Alvarez, is because of his mastery of Boxing. His body is older, but his mind and skill set are still there, and that echos with Hopkins. The other guys have every right to be better off physically, but they just don't understand this game in the way that they should.

That's the biggest problem, the skills that younger fighters are developing aren't what they used to be. There's a lack of quality trainers around, and that hinders the development of younger generations.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> A huge difference for me, is that the younger fighters you mentioned like Terry Norris, had great skill sets, craft. The reason Mayweather can beat guys like Ortiz and Alvarez, is because of his mastery of Boxing. His body is older, but his mind and skill set are still there, and that echos with Hopkins. The other guys have every right to be better off physically, but they just don't understand this game in the way that they should.
> 
> That's the biggest problem, the skills that younger fighters are developing aren't what they used to be. There's a lack of quality trainers around, and that hinders the development of younger generations.


yeah that's the glaring thing to me. It's not just that they're younger and and faster. They were also very skilled in their own right. It's not a thing where older fighters are more skilled and crafty, so that's why they're dominating nowadays. In previous eras, the younger fighters had plenty of skill.


----------



## Doc (Jun 6, 2013)

Agreed, Mayweather wouldn't be undefeated without his calculated retirements or having to compete in this era.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

I'll drop this off here also


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I'll drop this off here also


After this fight, they tried to make Leonard vs Oscar.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I'll drop this off here also


An obvious example of Leonard not having proper skills and relying on his reflexes and youth only.

As soon as his speed left him, he got schooled.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

Just another example of why all this "TBE" talk is simply laughable.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> An obvious example of Leonard not having proper skills and relying on his reflexes and youth only.
> 
> As soon as his speed left him, he got schooled.


 I didn't say that now :smile


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Fighters today are simply more reliant on skills which is a product of age and experience.
Youth is a thing of the past. :bart

Just kidding.

This era is a bit weaker than the previous stronger ones, but modern athletes also tend to last longer than those of yesteryear.
If I look at a list of the best football players of 2014-2015 season.
The 15 highest rated are all 25+ with the exception of Neymar who's 23. (average age 27.8 years)

While that's 7 year difference with boxing, in football youth/speed/athleticism is relatively much more important than it is in boxing.
Though a 7 year gap is still hard to explain even if youth is less important in boxing.

I don't think we'll ever seen an era again where the best boxers average under 28-30 years of age regardless of the strength of that era.
(But I also think this era isn't particularly strong.)

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...-boundaries/8dYSYEfrUfE3ImtV8t3dkM/story.html

In 1982, there were two players 35 or older on NBA opening night rosters; last fall, there were 20. Among them were Pierce and Kevin Garnett, of course, but also stalwarts like Tim Duncan, now 37, and Manu Ginobili, 35, who helped propel the San Antonio Spurs to the NBA Finals.

In the NHL, there were four players 35 or older in 1982, but 56 started this season.

In the NFL, the corresponding numbers are 14 and 40.

Olympians are also getting older.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Great thread, well presented.


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

I do agree that this coming generation has failed so far to take on the reigns of the outgoing gen. I reckon theres lots of reasons for this, but one that stands out for me is the lack of competition that fighters have before they reach the top of the division.

Wilder and Fury are great examples of this in the HW division. Both could well get in there with Wlad this year (a guy with nearly 20 title defences), and between them they have fought Stiverne, Cunningham and Chisora as top flight opposition. _Between them_. Does this prepare you for a fight with Wlad? It's not like they havent had time to fight better opposition, they have just preffered instead to build records and engineer a shot at the big time without having to pay their dues.

In the lower weight classes Broner made it to stardom having done very little in the way of gaining experience and fighting guys who will recognise his flaws and make him work on them. In comes Maidana who exploits them all in one night.

Theres loads of examples which I cba to break down now (Leo Santa Cruz, Povetkin (though he is doing better post Wlad), Berto, Brook, Ortiz, Canelo (pre floyd), Haye, etc) who either are or were talented fighters cruising along content to fight a few decent contenders and tread water until big fights presented themselves. Some ended up coming unstuck against average fighters, others ended up fighting the top dog looking well out of their league (others are still treading water).. What it boils down to imo is wanting the easiest route to the big money fights, and fighters getting the spotlight put on them too early in their careers. Guys like say, Joshua, come out of the Ams with huge contracts, headlining shows, earning big bucks, before theyve achieved anything. It means promoters are afraid to match them tough because they have invested big money and need to ensure a return. Fear of taking an L has taken precidence over actually taking on meaningful competition and improving as a fighter.

Just one side of it I know. But frustrating to see.


----------



## ThatBoxingGuy2022 (Aug 28, 2014)

Id say its mostly because boxers are cherry picking their way up to get world title

Look at someone like GRJ has amazing hand speed and great skills everything you need but when he fought Loma he had no plan b

He needed them tough fights along the way kind of like how Rigo had trouble with Cordoba, Brook vs Jones I was a big learning experience for him, most of these prospects just knock bums out left right and centre and try and get a world title


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

147lbs in particular is a weak and very overrated division today.

Compare it to that of the 00's, and 90s (no need to even mention 80s) and its fucking laughable in comparison. May weather and Pacquiao are old and past it, yet far ahead of everyone else in their division..I mean who else is left? Thurman? Brook? Bradley?

These guys are OK, but wouldn't be shit in previous eras.

But overall yeah, todays era is weak as shit.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

dyna said:


> Fighters today are simply more reliant on skills which is a product of age and experience.
> Youth is a thing of the past. :bart
> 
> Just kidding.
> ...


good pieces of counter argument. I didn't want to age to be the only determining factor on how strong an era is, but it's the easiest to display. 


Flea Man said:


> Great thread, well presented.


thanks, I figured you'd like it :good


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Any up and coming ATG LHW would have stopped Hopkins as well. That goes to show that the talent pool & skill level is really low, despite kovalev being a very good fighter. think about it. Can you realistically see 50 year old Bhop going the distance with Michael Spinks, Ezzard Charles, Dwight Qawi, archie moore or saad muhammad? I don't think so.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Zopilote said:


> 147lbs in particular is a weak and very overrated division today.
> 
> Compare it to that of the 00's, and 90s (no need to even mention 80s) and its fucking laughable in comparison. May weather and Pacquiao are old and past it, yet far ahead of everyone else in their division..I mean who else is left? Thurman? Brook? Bradley?
> 
> ...


Welterweight is smaller. The guys there aren't the size of a Hearns, or even an Oscar or Tito.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

I disagree, I think talent wise boxing is on the up for the first time in a few years. We have Verdejo, Valdez, Usyk, Joshua, Loma, Khytrov, Inoue, Crawford Gonzalez and many more are coming up or already arrived. All top class talents still in their 20's. Beterbiev is 30 but he will around for quite a while imo.

I think American talent is declining though for sure. But American boxing fans are going to have become less myopic in their views and support foreign fighters


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Michael said:


> I disagree, I think talent wise boxing is on the up for the first time in a few years. We have Verdejo, Valdez, Usyk, Joshua, Loma, Khytrov, Inoue, Crawford Gonzalez and many more are coming up or already arrived. All top class talents still in their 20's. Beterbiev is 30 but he will around for quite a while imo.
> 
> I think American talent is declining though for sure. But American boxing fans are either going to have become less myopic in their views and support foreign fighters


well until those fighters actually do anything, I stand firm on my position.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> well until those fighters actually do anything, I stand firm on my position.


They will, just give it time


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Michael said:


> They will, just give it time


I hope so. Errol Spence gives me that me vibes of those welterweights from a couple decades ago to add to your list of prospects.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I hope so. Errol Spence gives me that me vibes of those welterweights from a couple decades ago to add to your list of prospects.


I agree, i like Spence and hope he does well. I like how boxing is become more globalized but I think its important to keep a steady flow of good American talent coming up. Its still where boxing makes its money.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I hope so. Errol Spence gives me that me vibes of those welterweights from a couple decades ago to add to your list of prospects.


:deal


----------



## Atlanta (Sep 17, 2012)

I'll just leave this here:


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

lack of critical thinking skills? Even in schools these days, kids are not being taught how to overcome something by experimentation. They are conditioned to not not take risks, and to not try something until its 100% certain you won't fuck up. That could explain why so few fighters can change gameplans mid fight

Also fighters these days are more muscular, with the body of a sprinter which could effect stamina, compared to fighters 20 years ago, who had the bodies of an endurance runner


I have no clue what I'm talking about....just a suggestion


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Michael said:


> I disagree, I think talent wise boxing is on the up for the first time in a few years. We have Verdejo, Valdez, Usyk, Joshua, Loma, Khytrov, Inoue, Crawford Gonzalez and many more are coming up or already arrived. All top class talents still in their 20's. Beterbiev is 30 but he will around for quite a while imo.
> 
> I think American talent is declining though for sure. But American boxing fans are going to have become less myopic in their views and support foreign fighters


America has 16 world titlists, more than any other country and more than 10 years ago and considering Cotto, Marquez, Pacquiao, Golovkin and Kovalevs popularity at the moment what you say makes little sense as always

As for the guys you listed non of which have done anything in boxings premier divisions, that being welter, middle and heavy. Either they are tiny or unproven


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> America has 16 world titlists, more than any other country and more than 10 years ago and considering Cotto, Marquez, Pacquiao, Golovkin and Kovalevs popularity at the moment what you say makes little sense as always
> 
> As for the guys you listed non of which have done anything in boxings premier divisions, that being welter, middle and heavy. Either they are tiny or unproven


I was directing that last part at narrow minded American boxing fans who seem to have a chip on their soldiers when it comes to foreign fighters. I wont name names, but ive noticed a few around.

Whether they are small or not is irrelevant to my point, I was just talking about the overall talent level of these guys, many of whom are in smaller divisions. Not saying all of them will be incredibly popular either. I know talent when I see it and many of these guys have exceptional ability, even if they are at prospect stage.

And yeah America still has some really good fighters admittedly, there aren't too many young guys who stand out to me though. Maybe a few will come up under the radar Crawford style though. Spence will definitely do something anyways.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Atlanta said:


> I'll just leave this here:


crafty Bailey using his veteran tricks of tripping Jones and punching him to the back of the head


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

FloydPatterson said:


> lack of critical thinking skills? Even in schools these days, kids are not being taught how to overcome something by experimentation. They are conditioned to not not take risks, and to not try something until its 100% certain you won't fuck up. That could explain why so few fighters can change gameplans mid fight
> 
> Also fighters these days are more muscular, with the body of a sprinter which could effect stamina, compared to fighters 20 years ago, who had the bodies of an endurance runner
> 
> I have no clue what I'm talking about....just a suggestion


Talking about the change in physiques, I've always found it interesting that Joe Calzaghe was one of the fitter fighters we've seen in the past 50 years, and he didn't have a S&C coach, he just tried to keep up with his crazy old man and ran a lot of hills in Wales.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

SJS20 said:


> Talking about the change in physiques, I've always found it interesting that Joe Calzaghe was one of the fitter fighters we've seen in the past 50 years, and he didn't have a S&C coach, he just tried to keep up with his crazy old man and ran a lot of hills in Wales.


He didnt have an impressive physique either. You have to be born with that kind of natural stamina. Stamina can obviously be improved massively, but 99% of fighters will never have the engine that Joe had, in spite of their dedication to training and utilizing the most modern methods


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Floyd and Pac were p4p #1 and #2 today? There are at least 10 fighters who I'd pick to beat them both if they were the same weight. People forget what pound for pound means.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Any up and coming ATG LHW would have stopped Hopkins as well. That goes to show that the talent pool & skill level is really low, despite kovalev being a very good fighter. think about it. Can you realistically see 50 year old Bhop going the distance with Michael Spinks, Ezzard Charles, Dwight Qawi, archie moore or saad muhammad? I don't think so.


I can see Hopkins going the distance with anyone, heavyweights included.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Talking about the change in physiques, I've always found it interesting that Joe Calzaghe was one of the fitter fighters we've seen in the past 50 years, and he didn't have a S&C coach, he just tried to keep up with his crazy old man and ran a lot of hills in Wales.


He also couldn't punch, was easily injured and had poor technique. Pitter patter doesn't wear you out. Define 'fitness'? Because anaerobically he was garbage and a poor specimen.


----------



## Concrete (Oct 5, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> A huge difference for me, is that the younger fighters you mentioned like Terry Norris, had great skill sets, craft. The reason Mayweather can beat guys like Ortiz and Alvarez, is because of his mastery of Boxing. His body is older, but his mind and skill set are still there, and that echos with Hopkins. The other guys have every right to be better off physically, but they just don't understand this game in the way that they should.
> 
> That's the biggest problem, the skills that younger fighters are developing aren't what they used to be. There's a lack of quality trainers around, and that hinders the development of younger generations.


Whats crazy is that this has applied to every single sport over the years and possibly all things in general. Fundamentals and craft have all been diminished across the board from sports to music probably all forms of entertainment. If I really researched it probably all forms of life even the food we eat.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Michael said:


> He didnt have an impressive physique either. You have to be born with that kind of natural stamina. Stamina can obviously be improved massively, but 99% of fighters will never have the engine that Joe had, in spite of their dedication to training and utilizing the most modern methods


atsch
No one is born with stamina ffs


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Concrete said:


> Whats crazy is that this has applied to every single sport over the years and possibly all things in general. Fundamentals and craft have all been diminished across the board from sports to music probably all forms of entertainment. If I really researched it probably all forms of life even the food we eat.


No, it's just because you have greater access to everything instead of only what rises to the top. Plus you have more people doing everything so you see a lot of shit. Research yourself and why you have such a poorly thought out perception of the world.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

FloydPatterson said:


> lack of critical thinking skills? Even in schools these days, kids are not being taught how to overcome something by experimentation. They are conditioned to not not take risks, and to not try something until its 100% certain you won't fuck up. That could explain why so few fighters can change gameplans mid fight
> 
> Also fighters these days are more muscular, with the body of a sprinter which could effect stamina, compared to fighters 20 years ago, who had the bodies of an endurance runner
> 
> *I have no clue what I'm talking about*....just a suggestion


Clearly


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> atsch
> No one is born with stamina ffs


Born is probably the wrong word to use fair enough, but surely the kind of stamina which Joe possessed is an attribute that most fighters would never be able to attain? How else would you explain a guy like Joe, had archaic training methods, yet could easily throw a 100 punches a round? I think Jermain Taylor trained hard and he looked in great shape, but he used to gas like fuck in his fights, even at his peak years.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> I can see Hopkins going the distance with anyone, heavyweights included.


even a past prime, 50 year old version? ok fair enough, we just disagree then. i cant see that version of bhop going the distance with spinks foster charles moore or qawi.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Michael said:


> I think Jermain Taylor trained hard and he looked in great shape, but he used to gas like fuck in his fights, even at his peak years.


Taylor was tenser than pre-Steward Wolodya.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Michael said:


> Born is probably the wrong word to use fair enough, but surely its a natural attribute though and most fighters would never be able to attain Joe's stamina? How else would you explain a guy like Joe, had archaic training methods, yet could easily throw a 100 punches a round? I think Jermain Taylor trained hard and he looked in great shape, but he used to gas like fuck in his fights, even at his peak years.


It's not a natural attribute in the slightest. Calzaghe had aerobic stamina due to his constant running. He was obviously a predominantly slow twitch athlete. His 100 punches a round were weak, often pitter patter and often slapping. He was often injured and couldn't punch. He didn't fight at a high intensity, he fought at a steady pace that didn't tire him out. Jermain Taylor threw power punches and didn't worry about gassing, he fought at a high intensity so he'd gas.
In boxing due to the weight classes Joe could get away with being a terrible athlete because of his size, if he trained like a proper athlete lifting weights and getting some power he'd probably be somewhere between light heavy and cruiser. At super middle he was a drained marathon runner.
And if you compared Joe's aerobic stamina to athletes in other aerobic sports you'd find that he's nothing special at all.


----------



## PJ. (Jun 6, 2013)

undetectable PE...


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Taylor was tenser than pre-Steward Wolodya.


And he'd throw every punch with power, just like David Haye and others who supposedly 'gas' easily. Calzaghe didn't throw any punch with power, he wasn't capable of that so his 'stamina' held up fine.


----------



## Concrete (Oct 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> No, it's just because you have greater access to everything instead of only what rises to the top. Plus you have more people doing everything so you see a lot of shit. Research yourself and why you have such a poorly thought out perception of the world.


NBA players can't even shoot mid range jumpers any more efficiently. Guards used to shoot the ball at a 50% clip now the average guard shoots at like 43%. Hip Hop music has gone down the drain everything is geared toward ignorance and catch phrases rather then actual meaningful songs that connect to peoples lives as its more entertaining. Businesses care less about consumers and move about how to skim as much as possible while increasing prices. They were selling fake hamburger meat for goodness sake.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Concrete said:


> NBA players can't even shoot mid range jumpers any more efficiently. Guards used to shoot the ball at a 50% clip now the average guard shoots at like 43%. Hip Hop music has gone down the drain everything is geared toward ignorance and catch phrases rather then actual meaningful songs that connect to peoples lives as its more entertaining. Businesses care less about consumers and move about how to skim as much as possible while increasing prices. They were selling fake hamburger meat for goodness sake.


The 3 point shot has made the mid range jumper obsolete. Players are able to shoot the 3 so well now that it doesnt make sense to gear and offense around taking inefficient two pointers. We see that with teams like the Cavs and Warriors and Spurs from last year, who are built around perimeter shooters.

NBA scouts now look for players who can defend on the wing and hit spot up 3 pointers.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Concrete said:


> NBA players can't even shoot mid range jumpers any more efficiently. Guards used to shoot the ball at a 50% clip now the average guard shoots at like 43%. Hip Hop music has gone down the drain everything is geared toward ignorance and catch phrases rather then actual meaningful songs that connect to peoples lives as its more entertaining. Businesses care less about consumers and move about how to skim as much as possible while increasing prices. They were selling fake hamburger meat for goodness sake.


That's a meaningless stat that has many possible explanations. Your opinion on hip hop music is purely subjective, ignorant shit has always been popular. Businesses care about money over everything else.. wow that's new.
Read some books and expand your mind dude, you have a very limited perspective. And even then you need to understand how limited your perspective is at it's best.


----------



## LeapingHook (Jan 2, 2014)

I think it's to do with the matchmaking, fighters of previous generations took more risks in their careers, by the time the fighter's step up nowadays they are in their late 20s/early 30s.


----------



## scorpion (Jun 24, 2013)

I agree with OP but i just can't really pin point what it is. It's not even just the lack of skills, we got some skilled fighters today it seems more mental to me to a certain extent Like fighters are more risk averse and afraid of being damaged goods or something or maybe it's the increasing quality of life that makes then soft which would explain why guys like GGG, Kovalev, Gonzalez etc are starting to dominate the sport they come from places where it's dog eat dog.


----------



## scorpion (Jun 24, 2013)

Also it's stupid how small Floyd and especially Manny are for welters. Floyd at least got decent reach but Pac is 5'5 and has a 67 reach. Can you guys imagine either one against 6'1 Hearns, 5'11 Robinson, Trinidad, 5'10 Prime Oscar or SRL. Damn man it's too much even thinking about it.


----------



## thehook13 (May 16, 2013)

Combination of a weaker era, smarter match making, less frequent fights, better trained athletes. There's no clear answer IMO. 

But i will say Kovalev, Gennady, Rigo, Froch pretty much all won their first titles in their 30's. Gennady was 28 I think but their old ages raises the average a fair bit and it's not like they are long reigning champions dominating every new comer from an early age. They're all fairly exceptional short term champions actually. Froch has reigned the longest with a title in 2008 so i suppose he's a fairly decent champion. Timothy not a long time p4p champion, Gonzalez either.

Manny/Wlad/Floyd/JMM however are all old and have dominated on the p4p list for a long time now and really put the new era to shame by coming out on top.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

scorpion said:


> Also it's stupid how small Floyd and especially Manny are for welters. Floyd at least got decent reach but Pac is 5'5 and has a 67 reach. Can you guys imagine either one against 6'1 Hearns, 5'11 Robinson, Trinidad, 5'10 Prime Oscar or SRL. Damn man it's too much even thinking about it.


Duran, 5'7, 66" reach.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

scorpion said:


> Also it's stupid how small Floyd and especially Manny are for welters. Floyd at least got decent reach but Pac is 5'5 and has a 67 reach. Can you guys imagine either one against 6'1 Hearns, 5'11 Robinson, Trinidad, 5'10 Prime Oscar or SRL. Damn man it's too much even thinking about it.


Reach is one of the most overrated attributes in boxing. Head movement and timing negate any advantages of longer reach and having a shorter reach helps out with hand speed and inside fighting. Longer reach only comes into play if you're trying to avoid a fight and you have a predictable fighter in front of you.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

SJS20 said:


> Welterweight is smaller. The guys there aren't the size of a Hearns, or even an Oscar or Tito.


Yet bar Mayweather and Pacquiao they probably weigh more in the ring than all of them. Look at pretty much every other welterweight era--including the 70's--and the welterweights were the same size as May and Pac. Napoles was smaller.



bballchump11 said:


> I hope so. Errol Spence gives me that me vibes of those welterweights from a couple decades ago to add to your list of prospects.


Really not that excited about him. Typical over-hyped American prospect.



MichiganWarrior said:


> America has 16 world titlists


Which of them are actually the no.1 champion in their division though?



LeapingHook said:


> I think it's to do with the matchmaking, fighters of previous generations took more risks in their careers, by the time the fighter's step up nowadays they are in their late 20s/early 30s.


Agreed. The common way to bring up a prospect nowadays is 25 fights against absolute nobodies that makes them look like knockout artists then a steep jump up they're not prepared for.



scorpion said:


> I agree with OP but i just can't really pin point what it is. It's not even just the lack of skills, we got some skilled fighters today it seems more mental to me to a certain extent Like fighters are more risk averse and afraid of being damaged goods or something or maybe it's the increasing quality of life that makes then soft which would explain why guys like GGG, Kovalev, Gonzalez etc are starting to dominate the sport they come from places where it's dog eat dog.


It's the fact that most fighters train to cut weight and not to further their skillset.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Duran, 5'7, 66" reach.


Beat me to it :lol:



Flea Man said:


> Yet bar Mayweather and Pacquiao they probably weigh more in the ring than all of them. Look at pretty much every other welterweight era--including the 70's--and the welterweights were the same size as May and Pac. Napoles was smaller.
> 
> It's the fact that most fighters train to cut weight and not to further their skillset.


The weightcutting is probably the biggest reason.
It wastes time and since big fighters can fight in smaller (often shorter) divisions those who would have been stocky pressure fighters in Robinon's era can choose to be counter-punchers in this one.
Alvarez is the best example, comes in the ring 170+ with a build like Jake Lamotta yet fights like a poor man's Toney.
Danny Garcia to an extent too.


----------



## Concrete (Oct 5, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> That's a meaningless stat that has many possible explanations. Your opinion on hip hop music is purely subjective, ignorant shit has always been popular. Businesses care about money over everything else.. wow that's new.
> Read some books and expand your mind dude, you have a very limited perspective. And even then you need to understand how limited your perspective is at it's best.


Quality is either there or its not and you can tell when its there or not no matter the circumstance. And quality has been lacking in a lot of areas of life. Of course there are many things that have been improved due to technology. But the first reply was more about people and there willingness to work on there craft to provide quality a quality product.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Boxing today is run much different then it was just 10-15 years ago. It's much more run from a business standpoint then as a sport. That mindset will definitely have a trickle down effect on the development of fighters. Andre Berto could be the poster boy for the new era. "Anyone can be champ! Just sign with us!"


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Any up and coming ATG LHW would have stopped Hopkins as well. That goes to show that the talent pool & skill level is really low, despite kovalev being a very good fighter. think about it. Can you realistically see 50 year old Bhop going the distance with Michael Spinks, Ezzard Charles, Dwight Qawi, archie moore or saad muhammad? I don't think so.


Kovalev fought a cautious fight since it was his first fight that could realistically go 12 rounds.
And Hopkins fought beyond a negative fight, the only 2 times he opened up he got put on his ass when Sergey countered him in the first and the 12th where Hopkins was almost out of it.

And I don't think Hopkins when he's really focused on just surviving is stoppable by any fighter.

Also the other guys you mentioned have names on their record they didn't stop while others managed to.
Sugar Ray Anderson went 15 with Foster who only managed to last a minute against a bum named Charlie Green.
Hopkins has never been stopped



Spoiler











Also a stoppage victory doesn't have to be more telling than a complete 12-0 shut-out.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Also Maxie Roosenbloom wouldn't have stopped Hopkins either, that must obviously mean he's not an ATG at that weight.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> He also couldn't punch, was easily injured and had poor technique. Pitter patter doesn't wear you out. Define 'fitness'? Because anaerobically he was garbage and a poor specimen.


Purely out of curiosity what do you think of Marciano as an athlete/specimen?


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Agree with OP but it also (imo) has to do with the current champs being so dominant, i mean whats out there for Floyd, Rigo, GGG or Ward in their divisions who really challenges them? Same with Wlad but at least with him you got the chin factor and the fact that he didn't look very good in his last outing


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Huge blame on the fencing system the amateurs used and twenty years of fighters learning their trade against too many journeymen and cans for too long as well as more divided divisions, fighters not testing themselves, political factions, millions of belts, network pressure to protect fighters, obsession with holding a clean record.


----------



## Kid Generic Alias (Oct 29, 2013)

Atlanta said:


> I'll just leave this here:


Mike Jones was your prototypical hyped American prospect: a moderately decent athlete with little to zero fundamentals, versatility or ring intelligence.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Anyone else think that Deal With is just a total ball bag?


----------



## Drew101 (Jun 30, 2012)

It's weak in some of the better known divisions, but I actually think it's stronger on the whole than it's been in quite a while sub-featherweight. 

* Gonzalez compares quite favorably with any flyweight champion who's fought over the past few decades (and the division in general is as strong as it's been in quite a while).
* Yamanaka has established himself as a dominant bantamweight.
* Inoue looks absolutely scary at 115lbs.
* Wanheng and Knockout are among the better 105lb fighters to have come down the line in a while. Kosei Tanaka might be better than both of them.

Factor in a strong cruiserweight divisiion and there's still some quality boxing to watch, if you know where to look.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Really not that excited about him. Typical over-hyped American prospect...


Yikes.

I know you have some unpopular opinions but this takes the cake.

Spence will eventually be an elite level fighter. This im sure of. I dont know how you can look at Spence and say " oh, this guy is nothing special." Why dont you take the blinders off, Kyle. The kid has strong fundamentals. Very good power in either hand. Good work rate. Goes to the body like a seasoned pro. Solid defense considering his active style. And most of all he is a poised sharp shooter killa. There are reasons that stories float around about Spence beating up mayweather and TKOing broner in sparring. He is that good and i believe it.

Next fight is against Roberto Garcia which is a nice proper step up in class. Garcia was being considered for thurman before thurman fought Bundu, so that goes to show that its a fitted opponent for Spence.

Some other good fights for spence after he brutally deals with Garcia would be soto karass or judah. Still needs more fights against experienced opponents.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Next fight is against Roberto Garcia which is a nice proper step up in class. Garcia was being considered for thurman before thurman fought Bundu, so that goes to show that its a fitted opponent for Spence.


Robert Garcia is pretty average.
And Spence is overhyped. You are just another example of hyping hard. You are sure he will be "elite level"? Well I prefer to wait until a fighter actually fights a strong opponent And then you can say he might be great.
Spence has talent but its way too soon to call him the future of boxing. The hype he gets reminds me of Broner.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Robert Garcia is pretty average.
> And Spence is overhyped. You are just another example of hyping hard. You are sure he will be "elite level"? Well I prefer to wait until a fighter actually fights a strong opponent And then you can say he might be great.
> Spence has talent but its way too soon to call him the future of boxing. The hype he gets reminds me of Broner.


Im too high to really care too much about this. garcia is a step up. Thats all.

Yes im hyping because i believe hes the truth. Thats all prospects are until they beat some good fighters.

Lets not compare him to broner. At all. Spence already proved that he could stop broner with 16 oz gloves on.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Robert Garcia is pretty average.
> And Spence is overhyped. You are just another example of hyping hard. You are sure he will be "elite level"? Well I prefer to wait until a fighter actually fights a strong opponent And then you can say he might be great.
> Spence has talent but its way too soon to call him the future of boxing. The hype he gets reminds me of Broner.


im pretty sure that a lot of people were thinking eubanks was going to be elite level as well until he stepped up, if you want to call it that, in fighting bjs.

how about spence at least beat up a shopworn rios before we anoint him the next elite fighter?

ffs, we dont even know if this guy has a chin and were using words like elite?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Robert Garcia is pretty average.
> And Spence is overhyped. You are just another example of hyping hard. You are sure he will be "elite level"? Well I prefer to wait until a fighter actually fights a strong opponent And then you can say he might be great.
> Spence has talent but its way too soon to call him the future of boxing. The hype he gets reminds me of Broner.


Roberto Garcia is a really good opponent to take at this point in Spence's career. Roberto Garcia was also going to fight Shawn Porter until he got sick a couple months ago. He hasn't lost in 5 years and that loss was to Margarito. This fight will tell us a lot about Spence


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Roberto Garcia is a really good opponent to take at this point in Spence's career. Roberto Garcia was also going to fight Shawn Porter until he got sick a couple months ago. He hasn't lost in 5 years and that loss was to Margarito. This fight will tell us a lot about Spence


this is what I was saying but of course some fuckin idiot will say that it's not a good opponent for Spence.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Im too high to really care too much about this. garcia is a step up. Thats all.
> 
> Yes im hyping because i believe hes the truth. Thats all prospects are until they beat some good fighters.
> 
> Lets not compare him to broner. At all. Spence already proved that he could stop broner with 16 oz gloves on.


spence is a 147 and broner is a 140 so not entirely fair...and it was sparring

and the kd is suspect as it was broner and who knows what version of adrian was there as hes unpredictable and a nut job

look at him here claiming hes bench pressing 315...when its 235 and the bars not even touching his chest


----------



## scorpion (Jun 24, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Yet bar Mayweather and Pacquiao they probably weigh more in the ring than all of them. Look at pretty much every other welterweight era--including the 70's--and the welterweights were the same size as May and Pac. Napoles was smaller.
> 
> Really not that excited about him. Typical over-hyped American prospect.
> 
> ...


Could be but guys like crawford, peterson seem to do alright.



Dealt_with said:


> Reach is one of the most overrated attributes in boxing. Head movement and timing negate any advantages of longer reach and having a shorter reach helps out with hand speed and inside fighting. Longer reach only comes into play if you're trying to avoid a fight and you have a predictable fighter in front of you.


I have to sorta disagree, if you look at someone like Floyd, Wlad their reach plays an integral part of their arsenal. I'm not saying that's all they have but it's a very noticeable advantage they have regardless of how skilled their opponent is. But i was simply bringing it up as another disadvantage pacman has on other welters besides age.



Flea Man said:


> Duran, 5'7, 66" reach.


But he is an exception to the rule like pac not the norm though. There is always a fighter that comes once a decade and defies whatever odds that present themselves.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> this is what I was saying but of course some fuckin idiot will say that it's not a good opponent for Spence.


lol yeah that's what you can expect from these clowns. They must want Spence to fight Kell Brook next


----------



## JeffJoiner (Jun 5, 2013)

Thomas Crewz said:


> I do agree that this coming generation has failed so far to take on the reigns of the outgoing gen. I reckon theres lots of reasons for this, but one that stands out for me is the lack of competition that fighters have before they reach the top of the division.
> 
> Wilder and Fury are great examples of this in the HW division. Both could well get in there with Wlad this year (a guy with nearly 20 title defences), and between them they have fought Stiverne, Cunningham and Chisora as top flight opposition. _Between them_. Does this prepare you for a fight with Wlad? It's not like they havent had time to fight better opposition, they have just preffered instead to build records and engineer a shot at the big time without having to pay their dues.
> 
> ...


Back in the day managers wanted prospects to have some tough fights against veterans. They wanted the kids to get tested, maybe even take a loss. Most people learn far more from failure and adversity than success.

Nowadays, people want to protect their zero more than anything and that stalls development.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Purely out of curiosity what do you think of Marciano as an athlete/specimen?


A naturally big boned guy (so tends to be strong regardless of how he trains) with endless determination... as an athletic specimen terrible, very slow especially considering how small he actually was, and his boxing technique/coordination wasn't exactly the sweet science. He'd never be good in any sport where you couldn't win just by out-willing an opponent.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Im just going to be the optimistic motherfucker in this thread and leave this video right here






Sweet Jesus.....................those angles tho!


----------



## LeapingHook (Jan 2, 2014)

Michael said:


> Im just going to be the optimistic motherfucker in this thread and leave this video right here
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I honestly think he's got the best footwork bar none in boxing. (I know his opponent isn't exactly the biggest challenge here but still)


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Interesting thread


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I recently watched Sugar Ray Leonard vs Terry Norris and at the age of 34, Leonard didn't look that bad. He still had really good handspeed and still a capable fighter. I would pick that Leonard to still beat many fighters at 154 today. Terry Norris beat the shit out of him though and made him look like an old man. Norris was 23 years old at the time. Flip back to now, and we have 34 year old Mayweather dominating 24 year old Ortiz, and a 36 year old Mayweather schooling 23 year old Canelo. I won't even touch on what Hopkins has done.
> 
> Speaking of Norris, lets look at the p4p list after his fight with Leonard*
> 
> ...


Very well put there Bball. I know you hate coming off negative and shitting on boxing, but this is something I also find hard to keep quiet about. The most striking thing is the age of those on the lists of pound for pound fighters, and the fact that those fighters were ATG's in their weight classes and most even pound for pound (not just very good fighters). That comparison is some damning evidence.

I think sports science has a role to play in modern longevity, but I think the naked eye can show us it's in large part due to the lack of complete fighters in the next generation. It remains unclear whether Kovalev can turn his victory over Hopkins into long-term divisional dominance. So far he's looking good. But it took for an ATG to reach almost 50 to lose decisively. Same deal even if you go back to Dawson. And there's nobody else. Danny Garcia isn't about to do shit to Floyd and would likely get outclassed by even this version of Manny. Canelo had his chance and got embarrassed. The most vulnerable ATG left out there is probably Marquez due to his age and limitations at welterweight. But he's over 40 already.

smh.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> lol yeah that's what you can expect from these clowns. They must want Spence to fight Kell Brook next


Course not. Just want Americans to calm the fuck down just because a new black fighter has knocked out a load of no-hopers.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> Yikes.
> 
> I know you have some unpopular opinions but this takes the cake.
> 
> ...


No, you're just over hyping him as well.

And on here, you call me by my username. We're not friends, you don't call me Kyle. Thanks.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Very well put there Bball. I know you hate coming off negative and shitting on boxing, but this is something I also find hard to keep quiet about. The most striking thing is the age of those on the lists of pound for pound fighters, and the fact that those fighters were ATG's in their weight classes and most even pound for pound (not just very good fighters). That comparison is some damning evidence.
> 
> I think sports science has a role to play in modern longevity, but I think the naked eye can show us it's in large part due to the lack of complete fighters in the next generation. It remains unclear whether Kovalev can turn his victory over Hopkins into long-term divisional dominance. So far he's looking good. But it took for an ATG to reach almost 50 to lose decisively. Same deal even if you go back to Dawson. And there's nobody else. Danny Garcia isn't about to do shit to Floyd and would likely get outclassed by even this version of Manny. Canelo had his chance and got embarrassed. The most vulnerable ATG left out there is probably Marquez due to his age and limitations at welterweight. But he's over 40 already.
> 
> smh.


I think modern longevity is helped by the amount boxers fight plus level of opponents.

I mean its took Floyd nearly 20 years to amass 50 fights whereas that was the norm for boxers in around 10 years not so long back.

So ring-ware comes at an older age for boxers now hence them fighting later. It also seems boxers stepping up to world level takes a lot longer and many are turning over later.

You have a lot of guys emerging in the top group of fighters when they are around 30+ (Ward, Timmy, Kovalev, Adonis, Froch, Rigo as examples) whereas I believe boxers were hitting the top level quicker in decades gone.

Also there is more emphasis on promoters matching softer and looking to drag every penny out of a fight before taking large risks (unless the boxer isnt marketable enough) so fighters dont unify/make the big fights earlier in their career.

The sad thing is that this is proving more fruitful so I see no change. I mean Floyd Manny happened five years too late when both had fallen a fair bit from their peaks, one got KOd and the other struggled with a fighter he wouldnt once have and yet that fight only got bigger despite the skill levels falling off.


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

JeffJoiner said:


> Back in the day managers wanted prospects to have some tough fights against veterans. They wanted the kids to get tested, maybe even take a loss. Most people learn far more from failure and adversity than success.
> 
> Nowadays, people want to protect their zero more than anything and that stalls development.


Exactly. Its marketing thing, and I get it, but surely a better final product is worth more?

Producing a great fighter will make you more money than a weak undefeated record.

Naoya Inuoe is a great example of management that have dared to be great. They knew they had the goods, so they matched him tough from the start, risked losing (though he's been so good he hasnt actually taken that L yet) and are reaping the benefits now with a legit two weight champ in under 8 fights. Inuoeis a bit of an anomaly because he is a bit special, but even if he had lost a few times it wouldn't have mattered. Lomachenko is a good example too. Salido loss will have taught him more about top flight pro boxing that 20 wins against bums.

Also to some of the others talking about age, I think the shift in boxing towards Europe (in particular former soviet states) has meant that a lot of the best talent spends longer in the amateur system than they used too. We could have the next Rigondeaux, Kovalev and GGG scrapping away on the amateur circuit at 18-25 yrs old, where before a lot of the greats would have turned pro by now. Who's to say if Robeisy Ramirez (Cuban I know but still an amateur) had turned pro after his gold in 2012 at 18 years old he couldnt have been a P4P star by his mid 20's? Or Loma after winning gold in 2008 at 19(ish?)? I'm sure there are other examples too. Americans still turn over relatively early, but there does not seem to e the same volume of talent coming from the US that there used to be.

I hope that pro boxing will continue to take hold in Europe and fighters will grow up dreaming of world championships rather than Olympic golds.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Roberto Garcia is a really good opponent to take at this point in Spence's career. Roberto Garcia was also going to fight Shawn Porter until he got sick a couple months ago. He hasn't lost in 5 years and that loss was to Margarito. This fight will tell us a lot about Spence


Robert Garcia is still a pretty average fighter. His fight against prescott shows that. And just because Porter wanted to fight average Garcia it doesnt mean that he suddenly becomes a better fighter. Didnt also got dropped in his last fight against some no name? 
Spence will have an easy night with Garcia. In addition to just not being good, his style is made for Spence.
Its a step up but I dont act like it will be some great win. Spence gets hyped hard by some guys on here. If you cant see that you are blind.
Lets wait with the hype until Spence fights a good opponent. And no Garcia isnt good.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Thomas Crewz said:


> Exactly. Its marketing thing, and I get it, but surely a better final product is worth more?
> 
> Producing a great fighter will make you more money than a weak undefeated record.
> 
> ...


Great post.



Berliner said:


> Robert Garcia is still a pretty average fighter. His fight against prescott shows that. And just because Porter wanted to fight average Garcia it doesnt mean that he suddenly becomes a better fighter. Didnt also got dropped in his last fight against some no name?
> Spence will have an easy night with Garcia. In addition to just not being good, his style is made for Spence.
> Its a step up but I dont act like it will be some great win. Spence gets hyped hard by some guys on here. If you cant see that you are blind.
> Lets wait with the hype until Spence fights a good opponent. And no Garcia isnt good.


Exactly.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Spence is pretty good lads to be fair lads. I wouldn't class him as a talent on the level of Usyk or Loma, but he is well rounded, powerful, with solid fundamentals and nice variety to his work. He definitely has a title in him and he will be in some big fights in the coming years.

Robert Garcia is a good step up at this stage, solid fringe contender. Spence should be knocking on a title shot by this time next year if he keeps this up.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Thomas Crewz said:


> Exactly. Its marketing thing, and I get it, but surely a better final product is worth more?
> 
> Producing a great fighter will make you more money than a weak undefeated record.
> 
> ...


Id be inclined to agree with you on the great fighters turning pro later these days., but that leaves me with the fear that hundreds of amateur fights and big tournaments will leave them burnt out in the pro game very early. But then again fighters seem to be stepping up earlier these days to counter act that, like Loma, Rigo and Beterbiev. So we will probably have a lot more fighters winning world titles in like 10-15 fights which is an interesting, if as of yet rare development.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Michael said:


> Spence is pretty good lads to be fair lads. I wouldn't class him as a talent on the level of Usyk or Loma, but he is well rounded, powerful, with solid fundamentals and nice variety to his work. He definitely has a title in him and he will be in some big fights in the coming years.
> 
> Robert Garcia is a good step up at this stage, solid fringe contender. Spence should be knocking on a title shot by this time next year if he keeps this up.


No one has disputed this. Compare your posts to those of the Americans hyping him up.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> No, you're just over hyping him as well.
> 
> And on here, you call me by my username. We're not friends, you don't call me Kyle. Thanks.


You dont see talent when its right in front of your eyes. thats all it is, Kyle.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> You dont see talent when its right in front of your eyes. thats all it is, Kyle.


Okay, you're on ignore from now on.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Okay, you're on ignore from now on.


Im so hurt & devestated :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Very well put there Bball. I know you hate coming off negative and shitting on boxing, but this is something I also find hard to keep quiet about. The most striking thing is the age of those on the lists of pound for pound fighters, and the fact that those fighters were ATG's in their weight classes and most even pound for pound (not just very good fighters). That comparison is some damning evidence.
> 
> I think sports science has a role to play in modern longevity, but I think the naked eye can show us it's in large part due to the lack of complete fighters in the next generation. It remains unclear whether Kovalev can turn his victory over Hopkins into long-term divisional dominance. So far he's looking good. But it took for an ATG to reach almost 50 to lose decisively. Same deal even if you go back to Dawson. And there's nobody else. Danny Garcia isn't about to do shit to Floyd and would likely get outclassed by even this version of Manny. Canelo had his chance and got embarrassed. The most vulnerable ATG left out there is probably Marquez due to his age and limitations at welterweight. But he's over 40 already.
> 
> smh.


yeah really good points. I'm glad we're able to not just brush it off due to sports science, because we can see the difference in skill with these fighters nowadays. The old guys on the p4p list are pretty skilled, yes. These younger guys, not so much except for Lomachenko, Gonzalez, etc. To be on an optimistic note, maybe @micheal is right. We could be in a weak current era, but it's possible we're transitioning into a stronger one.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Course not. Just want Americans to calm the fuck down just because a new black fighter has knocked out a load of no-hopers.


you're genuinely a troll



Berliner said:


> Robert Garcia is still a pretty average fighter. His fight against prescott shows that. And just because Porter wanted to fight average Garcia it doesnt mean that he suddenly becomes a better fighter. Didnt also got dropped in his last fight against some no name?
> Spence will have an easy night with Garcia. In addition to just not being good, his style is made for Spence.
> Its a step up but I dont act like it will be some great win. Spence gets hyped hard by some guys on here. If you cant see that you are blind.
> Lets wait with the hype until Spence fights a good opponent. And no Garcia isnt good.


Roberto Garcia is pretty average in a vacuum. He'd be an awful opponent for Mayweather, bad opponent for Khan, decent opponent for Devon Alexander and good opponent for Spence

and Spence does get hyped up here pretty hard by some people, but what have you seen me say about him? I never said he's a future HOF, or that he's an atg. I'm not Deal_with. I just say he's my favorite prospect, and I'm excited to see how his career will unfold. I see things in him that I really like and that separate him from his peers.

I'm not going to crown him as anything as of now because there are too many unknowns, but for now, he's looking good.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Yup, I said this years ago with @Hands of Iron as much as I love Sergio he had no business being there with all of his flaws.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> you're genuinely a troll
> 
> Roberto Garcia is pretty average in a vacuum. He'd be an awful opponent for Mayweather, bad opponent for Khan, decent opponent for Devon Alexander and good opponent for Spence
> 
> ...


I didnt say that you hype him. At least I didnt want to. My point was that he gets overrated (at the moment) by some people.
With regards to Robert Garcia. In my opinion he is an average fighter becase he is pretty far away from being a world class fighter. It is a solid step up. But it was time Spence stepped up because really his last few opponents all have been shit. His best win probably is still Lartey and he fought him like two years ago. Ever since that fight he has fought low level opponents.
At the end Robert Garcia has nothing for Spence. Guy isnt fast, cant really punch, and just all around basic. I think he is made for Spence.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Berliner said:


> I didnt say that you hype him. At least I didnt want to. My point was that he gets overrated (at the moment) by some people.
> With regards to Robert Garcia. In my opinion he is an average fighter becase he is pretty far away from being a world class fighter. It is a solid step up. But it was time Spence stepped up because really his last few opponents all have been shit. His best win probably is still Lartey and he fought him like two years ago. Ever since that fight he has fought low level opponents.
> At the end Robert Garcia has nothing for Spence. Guy isnt fast, cant really punch, and just all around basic. I think he is made for Spence.


Spence is on a faster pace than plenty of prospects. Ronald Cruz and Samuel Vargas were decent opponents at that stage and he completely dominated them. He's moving along faster than any other fighter from the American team of 2012 and he's moving faster than the fighters from the 2008 team also.

I do agree with you that people should slow down with their expectations of him as of now. And Garcia is tough and will keep bringing pressure. He had Margarito trying to outbox him at a distance


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah really good points. I'm glad we're able to not just brush it off due to sports science, because we can see the difference in skill with these fighters nowadays. The old guys on the p4p list are pretty skilled, yes. These younger guys, not so much except for Lomachenko, Gonzalez, etc. To be on an optimistic note, maybe @micheal is right. We could be in a weak current era, but it's possible we're transitioning into a stronger one.


Right. I mean I'll never call a top 10 fighter a bum or say they're just getting by on a single attribute, I don't like disrespecting fighters. But at the same time, it's not like we're asking for much. We're not asking for another Leonard or something but damn, where are the Pryors? Where are the Donald Currys? Where are the Bennie Briscoes and Rocky Valdez's?

I think another good way of comparing eras would be to look for top contenders (not the reigning champions) of the past who we would expect to beat the champions today, like a few I just mentioned. Again I hate to shit on boxers but let's be frank about the completeness of some of today's divisional heads. Garcia at 140 is stiff, semi-flat footed, and just had a close fight with Lamont Peterson. Let me repeat: Lamont Peterson. Is he a bad fighter? No. Is he a poor contender in light of decades of quality 140-pounders? Yes. Same with Herrera. Then there's Canelo. He still shows promise but man, you'd think by the time he fought Lara, who isn't as good as negotiating distance and using a jab to keep a fighter guessing at arm's length as Floyd, he'd have learned to do something on the front foot. Nope. Next is Wilder. Has more skill than given credit for, but he and Stiverne looked like two guys who didn't know how to use their styles properly, fighting for a portion of the HW title. Could they even beat Oscar Bonavena?

Loma, Gonzales, Golovkin, Spence, Valdez, Verdejo all look good. But as the old greats start to bow out, we're left with question marks. The next page is yet unwritten.



Chatty said:


> I think modern longevity is helped by the amount boxers fight plus level of opponents.
> 
> I mean its took Floyd nearly 20 years to amass 50 fights whereas that was the norm for boxers in around 10 years not so long back.
> 
> ...


This is an important point also. Regardless of the usual accusations of handpicking, there are less opportunities for the young guns to get a crack at Floyd. But at the same time, he's fought the most threatening young pups. Ortiz blew his chance, Canelo got nearly shut out, Guerrero fought a sparring session. What you say about Maidana gave me an interesting thought; perhaps in another era, Maidana would have actually been able to turn Floyd's off night into a loss. It's only just recently that he became a more rounded fighter. What if, in another era, under a different trainer, he learned how to feint and jab on the attack sooner? What if he put more emphasis on slipping shots earlier in his career? Would he be able to dispose of a near-40 Mayweather by doing just a round or two better?


----------



## JeffJoiner (Jun 5, 2013)

Thomas Crewz said:


> Exactly. Its marketing thing, and I get it, but surely a better final product is worth more?
> 
> Producing a great fighter will make you more money than a weak undefeated record.
> 
> ...


Agreed. Great post.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

The longevity that the guys from today have is a result of the number of fights.. but the physical training of today is also a component that has relevance. Old school methods such as the way Joe Frazier used to run for example (with weight on his ankles, and similar stuff you read from other fighters) is terrible to your physical integrity in the long term, we have smarter ways to train these days. I canÂ´t imagine how often those guys from the past fought injured and physically worn out completely due to those hardcore training methods that once you pass the 26, 27 years old starts to pay a price.
We see guys peaking later on in other sports as well nowadays.. PelÃ© was past prime when he was 28 years old, today you can say that Cristiano Ronaldo is at his peak with 30, and IÂ´m talking about a sport that is played in a much more demanding way (physically speaking) today than it was in the past.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> The longevity that the guys from today have is a result of the number of fights.. but the physical training of today is also a component that has relevance. Old school methods such as the way Joe Frazier used to run for example (with weight on his ankles, and similar stuff you read from other fighters) is terrible to your physical integrity in the long term, we have smarter ways to train these days. I canÂ´t imagine how often those guys from the past fought injured and physically worn out completely due to those hardcore training methods that once you pass the 26, 27 years old starts to pay a price.
> We see guys peaking later on in other sports as well nowadays.. PelÃ© was past prime when he was 28 years old, today you can say that Cristiano Ronaldo is at his peak with 30, and IÂ´m talking about a sport that is played in a much more demanding way (physically speaking) today than it was in the past.


Double edged sword imo. No doubt those training techniques do damage to ypur body but that sort of training made boxers tougher and more resolute and able to deal better when they are dragged in the trenches.

Modern training is better for your body but it also spoils fighters who a lot of fold when they start hitting deep water.

Not all of course but I do think old school training has its benefits.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Double edged sword imo. No doubt those training techniques do damage to ypur body but that sort of training made boxers tougher and more resolute and able to deal better when they are dragged in the trenches.
> 
> Modern training is better for your body but it also spoils fighters who a lot of fold when they start hitting deep water.
> 
> Not all of course but I do think old school training has its benefits.


Sure, IÂ´m not disputing that those methods made guys tougher.

But when watching fights from today, I donÂ´t see soft guys fighting, I donÂ´t see the top guys folding, tell me one relevant fight were you see "oh okay, thatÂ´s a shame, he shouldnÂ´t be boxing, he doesnÂ´t have the toughness for it"

So, which benefits are better for you ? You can be physically in shape and less damaged training smarter.... or you can train like a lion, in a more hardcore regimen and became a mess when you hit 27 years old. Considering what I already mentioned about guys from today not being soft too... that no matter how you train, if you are training for a boxing match, your training is going to make you tough. If you made the world class level, you are tough!


----------



## Mr Magic (Jun 3, 2013)

It's not the 80s, I don't think it will ever be that great around WW/MW again.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Vic said:


> Sure, IÂ´m not disputing that those methods made guys tougher.
> 
> But when watching fights from today, I donÂ´t see soft guys fighting, I donÂ´t see the top guys folding, tell me one relevant fight were you see "oh okay, thatÂ´s a shame, he shouldnÂ´t be boxing, he doesnÂ´t have the toughness for it"
> 
> So, which benefits are better for you ? You can be physically in shape and less damaged training smarter.... or you can train like a lion, in a more hardcore regimen and became a mess when you hit 27 years old. Considering what I already mentioned about guys from today not being soft too... that no matter how you train, if you are training for a boxing match, your training is going to make you tough. If you made the world class level, you are tough!


James Kirkland is an example


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> James Kirkland is an example


What you mean, example of burning out quickly in physical terms, right? Not that I think Kirkland would ever be great with the lack of skills that he has but he used to train insanily tough with Ann Wolfe...

The dosage of training got smarter too preventing that early wastage of a manÂ´s vitality in life, Ad Wolgast used to run 10 miles every single day, and then 8 or 10 rounds of sparring, which in my view is actually unnecessary as much as it is bad for your physique, your body is not supposed to take that for years. Not to mention the problems from the brain with that amount of sparring damn. I think 3 to 5 miles of roadwork is enough, Aaron Pryor used to run 5 miles max, great stamina, Roy Jones ? 3-5 miles, canÂ´t remember him being ever tired...


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Sure, IÂ´m not disputing that those methods made guys tougher.
> 
> But when watching fights from today, I donÂ´t see soft guys fighting, I donÂ´t see the top guys folding, tell me one relevant fight were you see "oh okay, thatÂ´s a shame, he shouldnÂ´t be boxing, he doesnÂ´t have the toughness for it"
> 
> So, which benefits are better for you ? You can be physically in shape and less damaged training smarter.... or you can train like a lion, in a more hardcore regimen and became a mess when you hit 27 years old. Considering what I already mentioned about guys from today not being soft too... that no matter how you train, if you are training for a boxing match, your training is going to make you tough. If you made the world class level, you are tough!


Victor Ortiz is a great example.

Malik Scott, David Price, Audley Harrison as a few examples.

Not to say it would change them in particular (first names in my head) ot that any are soft, just think the easier lifestyle doesnt help them as they are mentally more suseptable.


Vic said:


> Sure, IÂ´m not disputing that those methods made guys tougher.
> 
> But when watching fights from today, I donÂ´t see soft guys fighting, I donÂ´t see the top guys folding, tell me one relevant fight were you see "oh okay, thatÂ´s a shame, he shouldnÂ´t be boxing, he doesnÂ´t have the toughness for it"
> 
> So, which benefits are better for you ? You can be physically in shape and less damaged training smarter.... or you can train like a lion, in a more hardcore regimen and became a mess when you hit 27 years old. Considering what I already mentioned about guys from today not being soft too... that no matter how you train, if you are training for a boxing match, your training is going to make you tough. If you made the world class level, you are tough!


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Victor Ortiz is a great example.
> 
> Malik Scott, David Price, Audley Harrison as a few examples.
> 
> Not to say it would change them in particular (first names in my head) ot that any are soft, just think the easier lifestyle doesnt help them as they are mentally more suseptable.


Well, Scott, Price and Harrison were never top class fighters, we can find guys like those in other eras too if we search.

Victor Ortiz is. It cames to my mind Mike Tyson though as similar in the folder aspect, guy from the 80s that was brought up by old school boxing guys and was one of the best of his era which Ortiz never was. I was almost posting this when Sonny Liston gotten to my mind.

I want to say that IÂ´m not disputing that old time fighters, in general, were harder. But it gets exageratted ? Yes, imo it does.

And my main point was that the longevity that we see today is also a matter of athletes not getting wasted early with outdated trainning methods (and hardcore, tough but ignorant overtraining training schedules).


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Well, Scott, Price and Harrison were never top class fighters, we can find guys like those in other eras too if we search.
> 
> Victor Ortiz is. It cames to my mind Mike Tyson though as similar in the folder aspect, guy from the 80s that was brought up by old school boxing guys and was one of the best of his era which Ortiz never was. I was almost posting this when Sonny Liston gotten to my mind.


I wouldnt class Tyson or possibly Liston depending on what you think went down in the Ali fights.

Tyson went out on hia shield in every fight he had before he was shot bar Holy 2 which was some sort of mental breakdown.

Listons a harder call because his reasoning could well have been being paid off or he could have just been KOd as he did start fighting again when he got up. First fight is a bit iffy with the pull out but those two fights were seriously dodgy.

Im sure ill think of more when I can sit down and thibk clearer but I think boxers can be more mentally fragile these days than in the past.


Vic said:


> Well, Scott, Price and Harrison were never top class fighters, we can find guys like those in other eras too if we search.
> 
> Victor Ortiz is. It cames to my mind Mike Tyson though as similar in the folder aspect, guy from the 80s that was brought up by old school boxing guys and was one of the best of his era which Ortiz never was. I was almost posting this when Sonny Liston gotten to my mind.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Chatty said:


> I wouldnt class Tyson or possibly Liston depending on what you think went down in the Ali fights.
> 
> Tyson went out on hia shield in every fight he had before he was shot bar Holy 2 which was some sort of mental breakdown.
> 
> ...


Do you agree that the training methods has a influence in the longevity that we see today (we do not see that higher longevity only in Boxing) ?

ItÂ´s not like Floyd Mayweather is fighting terribly with 38 years, we can see heÂ´s fighting well. A guy like Ezzard Charles was not at top when he was mid 30s, but we can see that he was not fighting well (he looks awful in the John Holman fights) anymore in his 33 or something canÂ´t remember.

Floyd Mayweather is still at the top because heÂ´s still fighting well.
Ezzard Charles was not at the top in his 30s because he was not fighting well anymore.

And in my humble opinion those two points are a result of:

*-number of fights, of course.
-the different training methods that make guys today last longer and made guys from the past worn out earlier.*
-eras, yes, weaker eras that make some guys get away with being old... (it doesnÂ´t make their jabs still good, quick, doesnÂ´t make them still fast, in shape and slipping punches well as we see many guys in their 30s still doing.)


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Do you agree that the training methods has a influence in the longevity that we see today (not exactly only in Boxing) ?
> 
> ItÂ´s not like Floyd Mayweather is fighting terribly with 38 years, we can see heÂ´s fighting well. A guy like Ezzard Charles was not at top when he was mid 30s, but we can see that he was not fighting well (he looks awful in the John Holman fights) anymore in his 33 or something canÂ´t remember.
> 
> ...


Sure, I think the way boxing is on the whole is built for top guys to last longer.

From the amateur system onwards its built for more longevity although I think we are seeing some changes to revert back somewhat.

Dont forget influx of belts, weights and less fights against higher calibre comp.


Vic said:


> Do you agree that the training methods has a influence in the longevity that we see today (we do not see that higher longevity only in Boxing) ?
> 
> ItÂ´s not like Floyd Mayweather is fighting terribly with 38 years, we can see heÂ´s fighting well. A guy like Ezzard Charles was not at top when he was mid 30s, but we can see that he was not fighting well (he looks awful in the John Holman fights) anymore in his 33 or something canÂ´t remember.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Sure, I think the way boxing is on the whole is built for top guys to last longer.
> 
> From the amateur system onwards its built for more longevity although I think we are seeing some changes to revert back somewhat.
> 
> Dont forget influx of belts, weights and less fights against higher calibre comp.


Yes, less fights against higher calibre comp. Sure.

But letÂ´s see this that got posted in another thread, look at that, the spirit of a boxer still is tough as old boots, as a rule, the exceptions to the rule that generally never make the elite anyway, are that, a exception.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Vic said:


> What you mean, example of burning out quickly in physical terms, right? Not that I think Kirkland would ever be great with the lack of skills that he has but he used to train insanily tough with Ann Wolfe...
> 
> The dosage of training got smarter too preventing that early wastage of a manÂ´s vitality in life, Ad Wolgast used to run 10 miles every single day, and then 8 or 10 rounds of sparring, which in my view is actually unnecessary as much as it is bad for your physique, your body is not supposed to take that for years. Not to mention the problems from the brain with that amount of sparring damn. I think 3 to 5 miles of roadwork is enough, Aaron Pryor used to run 5 miles max, great stamina, Roy Jones ? 3-5 miles, canÂ´t remember him being ever tired...


yeah I wouldn't call Kirkland's training oldschool, but it's a good example how his training made him very strong and resilient, but reduced his career greatly


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Vic said:


> What you mean, example of burning out quickly in physical terms, right? Not that I think Kirkland would ever be great with the lack of skills that he has but he used to train insanily tough with Ann Wolfe...
> 
> The dosage of training got smarter too preventing that early wastage of a manÂ´s vitality in life, Ad Wolgast used to run 10 miles every single day, and then 8 or 10 rounds of sparring, which in my view is actually unnecessary as much as it is bad for your physique, your body is not supposed to take that for years. Not to mention the problems from the brain with that amount of sparring damn. I think 3 to 5 miles of roadwork is enough, Aaron Pryor used to run 5 miles max, great stamina, Roy Jones ? 3-5 miles, canÂ´t remember him being ever tired...


Yeah, look at Rocky Marciano. He did an insane amount of training and retired at 32, which is young nowadays. Aside from some side things his back gave out on him and forced him to quit so early. If you think about that in today's terms if your back is gone by 32 that's shocking. Holyfield was around for a while but he was very hot and cold with his performances because he used to over train a lot. Monzon I think it was said that too many Americans go to war in sparring and that's why they can't perform on fight night. His training seemed quite casual from what I've read. Same with Robinson. It seemed like high intensity a lot of the time but the amount of rounds he did of things was minimal. He mainly kept in shape by fighting. All these guys had very good stamina.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> you're genuinely a troll
> 
> Roberto Garcia is pretty average in a vacuum. He'd be an awful opponent for Mayweather, bad opponent for Khan, decent opponent for Devon Alexander and good opponent for Spence
> 
> ...


You actually are a troll who tries to convince people you're a serious fan and analyst.

You DKSAB and clearly have an extra chromosome.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You actually are a troll who tries to convince people you're a serious fan and analyst.
> 
> You DKSAB and clearly have an extra chromosome.


Chill out man. You're too old to get into a flame war with me. You're always hopping on my nuts for some reason, and I try to hold back because I feel like maybe you don't realize how much of a dickhead you come off as sometimes. I'll let the kids gloves off though.

Take your grumpy ass somewhere else, Kyle.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Chill out man. You're too old to get into a flame war with me. You're always hopping on my nuts for some reason, and I try to hold back because I feel like maybe you don't realize how much of a dickhead you come off as sometimes. I'll let the kids gloves off though.
> 
> Take your grumpy ass somewhere else, Kyle.


I am a dickhead to you, because you are clearly a moron who talks utter tripe about topics he has no clue about. You are driven by fandom, not by analysis or rational thought.

EDIT: And it's not like I didn't give you props for this thread. It's a good'un.

And I'm not _old._ Aren't you like, 25 yourself?


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Love how theres butt hurt arguments in a topic everyone sort of agrees to


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> I am a dickhead to you, because you are clearly a moron who talks utter tripe about topics he has no clue about. You are driven by fandom, not by analysis or rational thought.
> 
> EDIT: And it's not like I didn't give you props for this thread. It's a good'un.
> 
> And I'm not _old._ Aren't you like, 25 yourself?


You're a dickhead to plenty. I'm sure @tommygun711 would agree when you got mad at him for what seems no apparent reason. It's weird, you go through more cycles than a woman. You're so emotional. One minute you want to hop on my dick and congratulate me for my thread, it's a good'un. Then the next minute you want to hop on my dick because your cycle has picked up again. I don't even know what set you off this time around, but I guess when women are menstruating, they don't need a reason to go off.

That's probably why you're not a mod anymore. They wanted somebody more emotionally stable. One minute you're hopping on somebody else's nuts, the next you're making a goodbye thread with a rope around your neck crying :lol:



knowimuch said:


> Love how theres butt hurt arguments in a topic everyone sort of agrees to


crazy huh?


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> James Kirkland is an example


There is a difference between being tough and having a soft chin. Kirkland sure as hell is tough but has no chin.


----------



## LuckyLuke (Jun 6, 2013)

Vic said:


> Do you agree that the training methods has a influence in the longevity that we see today (we do not see that higher longevity only in Boxing) ?
> 
> Itï¿½s not like Floyd Mayweather is fighting terribly with 38 years, we can see heï¿½s fighting well. A guy like Ezzard Charles was not at top when he was mid 30s, but we can see that he was not fighting well (he looks awful in the John Holman fights) anymore in his 33 or something canï¿½t remember.
> 
> ...


Plus genetics.

You could have exact the same career and training like Hopkins, you still wouldnt be able to fight like him at 50.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> You're a dickhead to plenty. I'm sure @tommygun711 would agree when you got mad at him for what seems no apparent reason. It's weird, you go through more cycles than a woman. You're so emotional. One minute you want to hop on my dick and congratulate me for my thread


Yeah I have yet to figure out Kyle. He pretty much got mad at me for referring to him as Kyle. I guess he thinks he's too high and mighty for me to call him that.. and disagreeing with him when he says "spence is nothing special."

Kyle "FleaMan" is very very pretentious and when he even slightly disagrees with a comment someone said, he'll go off and start calling them idiots, sayin they DKSAB and start flamming people for no reason.

it's too bad because its clear that he has a lot of knowledge and knows what he is talking about 90% of the time, but he has such a shitty pretentious attitude that it's almost not worth communicating with him.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

LuckyLuke said:


> There is a difference between being tough and having a soft chin. Kirkland sure as hell is tough but has no chin.


I mean that he's a very tough fighter who's training methods has made him even tougher, but a result is that it has shortened his career. 


tommygun711 said:


> Yeah I have yet to figure out Kyle. He pretty much got mad at me for referring to him as Kyle. I guess he thinks he's too high and mighty for me to call him that.. and disagreeing with him when he says "spence is nothing special."
> 
> Kyle "FleaMan" McLachlan is very very pretentious and when he even slightly disagrees with a comment someone said, he'll go off and start calling them idiots, sayin they DKSAB and start flamming people for no reason.
> 
> it's too bad because its clear that he has a lot of knowledge and knows what he is talking about 90% of the time, but he has such a shitty pretentious attitude that it's almost not worth communicating with him.


Yeah I'm still confused exactly why he's mad at you. I know it can't be because you called him by his name. I saw that he put you on ignore, and then I read back the conversation, and I'm still confused. Pretentious is the perfect word to describe him.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@*tommygun*711 @tommygun711 can't say for certain but I'd probably edit his surname out of your post cause I've seen people banned for doing that before. Be a bit daft getting banned just to make a point mate.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> @*tommygun*711 @tommygun711 can't say for certain but I'd probably edit his surname out of your post cause I've seen people banned for doing that before. Be a bit daft getting banned just to make a point mate.


it's on his fucking twitter that he provided on his "location" a while ago

but ok


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> it's on his fucking twitter that he provided on his "location" a while ago
> 
> but ok


I personally couldn't give a shit but I remember someone making a big fuss of it in the Brit forum not so long back and I'm pretty sure they got a month ban. Just thought I'd save you the drama if it goes down that route.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

:rofl Crazy drama in this thread.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> :rofl Crazy drama in this thread.


Also a lot of incorrect statements. As there are plenty of reasonable posters I have debates with if they disagree with me.

The difference between me flaming the uneducated ignorant folk and those I respect who have a differing view to mine is night and day.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Chatty said:


> I personally couldn't give a shit but I remember someone making a big fuss of it in the Brit forum not so long back and I'm pretty sure they got a month ban. Just thought I'd save you the drama if it goes down that route.


No, I wouldn't do anything like that. They are free to address me how they like, even if I don't particularly like it.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Also a lot of incorrect statements. As there are plenty of reasonable posters I have debates with if they disagree with me.
> 
> The difference between me flaming the uneducated ignorant folk and those I respect who have a differing view to mine is night and day.


are the ones you respect the ones who kiss your ass? Are you mad that I don't give a fuck that you can recite a bunch of boxing facts form the 30's?


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> are the ones you respect the ones who kiss your ass? Are you mad that I don't give a fuck that you can recite a bunch of boxing facts form the 30's?


Nobody kisses my ass. I'm about as unliked as anyone on here.

What I'm mad about is that you are a moron. A complete spastic who can barely string a coherent sentence together and who acts like he's got opinions when in fact he's just a biased fan of about five fighters.

Can we leave it at that now? I won't quote you anymore. We're done.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Nobody kisses my ass. I'm about as unliked as anyone on here.
> 
> What I'm mad about is that you are a moron. A complete spastic who can barely string a coherent sentence together and who acts like he's got opinions when in fact he's just a biased fan of about five fighters.
> 
> Can we leave it at that now? I won't quote you anymore. We're done.


I'm a big moron. You should tell that to my professors when I start the master of accounting program in August. A moron who kicked you out of a most knowledgeable poster tournament. So at the very least, I'm smarter than you :rofl I do have many opinions, like how you're a pretentious dickhead. You're as unliked as anyone on here because only a few people kiss your ass and respect what you have to say. You have some real bitch tendencies in you were you go around wanting to be liked by people but act like a little bitch. So when nobody gives you respect, you just try to cope with it and pretend you don't care. Deep down, we know you do though.

You started shit with me over nothing and this is what happens. I never start anything with you. Like I said, you have bitch tendencies. When I see that you post in a thread, sometimes I can just feel it's some snarky reply to me. When I see you're replying to me, I just think "Oh it's that time of the month". Keep my name out of your mouth.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I'm a big moron. You should tell that to my professors when I start the master of accounting program in August. A moron who kicked you out of a most knowledgeable poster tournament. So at the very least, I'm smarter than you :rofl I do have many opinions, like how you're a pretentious dickhead. You're as unliked as anyone on here because only a few people kiss your ass and respect what you have to say. You have some real bitch tendencies in you were you go around wanting to be liked by people but act like a little bitch. So when nobody gives you respect, you just try to cope with it and pretend you don't care. Deep down, we know you do though.
> 
> You started shit with me over nothing and this is what happens. I never start anything with you. Like I said, you have bitch tendencies. When I see that you post in a thread, sometimes I can just feel it's some snarky reply to me. When I see you're replying to me, I just think "Oh it's that time of the month". Keep my name out of your mouth.


'Master of accounting' :lol:

The reason you're an idiot is because you actually think you beat me in that debate, when in fact the only person being proven wrong on many, many counts, was you. That is a FACT. Go back and look. You got annihilated.

But don't worry I won't be quoting you anymore. I have no want to hear your opinion, and you don't want to hear mine. So I will put you on ignore and we'll both be happy.

And by the way, I honestly don't want to be 'liked'. Unlike yourself, I have an actual life outside of this forum.

Enjoy yours, and I do mean that sincerely. I hope it's a good one.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> 'Master of accounting' :lol:
> 
> The reason you're an idiot is because you actually think you beat me in that debate, when in fact the only person being proven wrong on many, many counts, was you. That is a FACT. Go back and look. You got annihilated.
> 
> ...


Yes as in a master's degree in accounting 

and that's funny because you didn't go to the next round. I never brought up the competition because I thought it'd be an assholish thing to do with rubbing it in or bragging about it. But since you want to talk shit so bad, I'll throw it right in your face. You got into a debate with a moron and got your ass kicked. I bet you felt very small after that, like a flea.

And thank you. Put me on ignore and get the fuck out of my thread fleabrain


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I bet you felt very small after that, like a flea.


:rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> :rofl


:lol: he started crap with both of us and the heat got too hot for him, so he retreated and put us on ignore


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

I had another thought the other night. I think a point against the idea that sports medicine and modern nutrition account for longevity of the current greats doesn't necessarily add up, because lots of young champions and contenders are not lasting even _as long_, despite having the benefit of access to those resources AND the advantage of youth. Some that come to mind:

Kelly Pavlik
Juan Diaz 
Victor Ortiz 
Jermain Taylor 
Chad Dawson
Andre Berto
Juan Manuel Lopez
Yuriorkis Gamboa

Each of those guys, one way or the other, was ranked and pegged by many to be the man, or at least a very formidable contender, for years to come. Somewhere along the way, they hit a wall; either a great fighter or dangerous one with their number stylistically (or both, either in the same opponent or consecutively). They never recovered. Never evolved and moved past that defeat to even the place that they were at. Some feel like they left before they even arrived. And yet they came onto the scene well after this generation's older ATG's. Regardless if you believe the hype or not, the point still stands. These guys can hire all the strength & conditioning coaches they want, go into those oxygen chambers, swim, get a nutritionist. They're still hitting ceilings and wasting their bodies faster in the process. It's down to skills.

Broner is still a question mark as he's still talented and as cocky as ever, but his career took a big hit. Same with Gamboa; we have yet to see whether he can become relevant again at his proper weight. Canelo and Garcia are trying to reclaim their hype after some setbacks; they haven't taken any damaging losses but have lost stock. Khan is also trying to climb his way back. These guys have avoided that path but there's a sense it could happen at any moment they step up in class.

So, yeah. I'm sure there are more examples we could think of, just wanted to contribute that argument.


----------



## Boogle McDougal (Jun 8, 2012)

Last time I checked the first few pages of this thread were pretty good, now everybody hates each other. Excellent.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I had another thought the other night. I think a point against the idea that sports medicine and modern nutrition account for longevity of the current greats doesn't necessarily add up, because lots of young champions and contenders are not lasting even _as long_, despite having the benefit of access to those resources AND the advantage of youth. Some that come to mind:
> 
> Kelly Pavlik
> Juan Diaz
> ...


That's a really good point. While the 10 best fighters are getting older, the rest of the field appears to be staying the same age despite them all using advanced training techniques. I'd have to actually average their ages out also to be sure, but that's a good observation.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

The change in opinions and attitudes in this thread from the beginning to now is actually comical :lol:

In the words of Samuel L.Jackson: YALL NEED TO CHILL!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> That's a really good point. While the 10 best fighters are getting older, the rest of the field appears to be staying the same age despite them all using advanced training techniques. I'd have to actually average their ages out also to be sure, but that's a good observation.


And some make it to that list and become shot before the greats do!

EDIT: Oh I see what you mean. Regardless of who it is, the ages for the rest of them are the same.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

I'll play the devils's advocate here, but could it only be something that happens from time to time in boxing history ? Like when old Louis, Walcott and Charles were at the top of the heavies ? I don't really believe so, but I wanted to trow that out there. 

I'm a strong believer that the journeyman of the 60's was way more skilled than your typical 2010's journeyman, but I'm also aware that people have been saying that since at least 1900, as is often stated in books of the period. Somebody mentionned the Wilder vs Bermane Stiverne fight and damn it was a good exemple of today's problem. A short stocky guy in the heavyweight division who doesn't know how to cut the ring off... Against Wilder who I won't bitch about because he won his fights and guys that tall looks goofy most of the time anyway. I also hope that you don't remember too much of Bradley vs Alexander fight from a few years ago and countless other fights like that. However, without alphabet titles a lot of today's champions would be seen as journeymen and maybe wouldn't be as criticized around here. 

I think it was Flea Man who was amazed at how Rubin Carter was seen as an unskilled slugger back then, while he clearly looks to have some solid fundamentals on film, for a contemporary viewer. I do think that the future is brighter. How refreshing is it to me to see Lomachenko hoping around his opponents, creating angles. How refreshing is it to see that nice mix of skills and power that characterizes most of those emerging Eastern European fighters. How refreshing is it to see Inoue's fast road to greatness. And finally, how refreshing is it to see Roman Gonzalez ?


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

@Flea Man @tommygun711 @bballchump11

flea should add me to his ignore list also


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Yeah I know this is obvious to some, but I feel the need to vent about it. The most recent realization came after May 2nd. Mayweather outclassed the number 2 p4p fighter in the world (depending on how and if you rate Ward), and proved he's the best of this generation. There were a few consequences of that though. A 38 year old man is the lineal champion at 147 and 154 and he holds 5 of the 8 major belts at both of those divisions.


Nobody reasonable ranked Pac at #2 in the world, he's been past it for years now and essentially all knowledgeable boxing insiders picked that fight to go exactly as it did. I don't think that bout had any real significance in regards to determining this era's strength.

You can say this era is weak for American fighters, but for international fighters this era is great.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> @Flea Man
> @tommygun711
> @bballchump11
> 
> flea should add me to his ignore list also


:lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Montero said:


> Nobody reasonable ranked Pac at #2 in the world, he's been past it for years now and essentially all knowledgeable boxing insiders picked that fight to go exactly as it did. I don't think that bout had any real significance in regards to determining this era's strength.
> 
> You can say this era is weak for American fighters, but for international fighters this era is great.


I strongly disagree, but it doesn't change my point at all even if you put Pacquiao at #3-4 p4p and the second best welterweight behind Mayweather


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You actually are a troll who tries to convince people you're a serious fan and analyst.
> 
> You DKSAB and clearly have an extra chromosome.


Ouch! :lol:

The way this thread transitioned is crazy.


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I strongly disagree, but it doesn't change my point at all even if you put Pacquiao at #3-4 p4p and the second best welterweight behind Mayweather


I put Manny around #8 p4p and I'm not even sure that he's a top 5 at 147lbs; he's not a true WW.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> Ouch! :lol:
> 
> The way this thread transitioned is crazy.


I noticed that you no longer try to talk shit to me directly, but love to giggle and cosign whenever has enough cojones to do it. 


Montero said:


> I put Manny around #8 p4p and I'm not even sure that he's a top 5 at 147lbs; he's not a true WW.


that's cool and all, but you're in the minority. 99% of people have him as the second best welterweight after he beat Bradley. I guess you could have him that low in the p4p list AFTER he lost to Mayweather


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I noticed that you no longer try to talk shit to me directly, but love to giggle and cosign whenever has enough cojones to do it.


Wow, tough talk coming from someone who does the same shit! Damn, you can't be this dumb.

Trying to up a fucking accounting degree from a school I had to put into fucking Google to find out what the fuck you were talking about. :rofl


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> Wow, tough talk coming from someone who does the same shit! Damn, you can't be this dumb.
> 
> Trying to up a fucking accounting degree from a school I had to put into fucking Google to find out what the fuck you were talking about. :rofl


If I have a problem with somebody, I can tell them as I'm doing now. You got emasculated the last time you tried me, so I guess now you're too scared to pop off at the mouth again. 
And I never mentioned my school in this thread.


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> that's cool and all, but you're in the minority. 99% of people have him as the second best welterweight after he beat Bradley. I guess you could have him that low in the p4p list AFTER he lost to Mayweather


I predicted a 117-111 win for Mayweather since the fight was signed, made plenty of videos about it even on the UCN channel. I just feel Manny has been faded for years now and even the Bradley rematch wasn't exactly what people thought because Tim isn't the same guy after the wars he's been in. Hell, he may very well lose to Jessie Vargas next month.

Either way, I think this era is solid overall. Hell man just look at 122-126 lbs


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Montero said:


> I predicted a 117-111 win for Mayweather since the fight was signed, made plenty of videos about it even on the UCN channel. I just feel Manny has been faded for years now and even the Bradley rematch wasn't exactly what people thought because Tim isn't the same guy after the wars he's been in. Hell, he may very well lose to Jessie Vargas next month.
> 
> Either way, I think this era is solid overall. Hell man just look at 122-126 lbs


Pacquiao and Mayweather were the top guys before. Pacquiao got laid out by Marquez and then lost to Bradley. That put Bradley comfortably behind Mayweather at welterweight. You have to give Pacquiao the number 2 spot after he beat Bradley. Nobody else has done anything to warrant that position since.

and many picked Mayweather to win similarly to that, but it doesn't change the fact that Mayweather and Pacquiao are far ahead of everybody else and they're 38 and 36 years old. Just means Mayweather>>Pacquiao>>>>the rest

and there are some division right now that are proving to be exceptions. Most of the smaller weight classes seem to be pretty strong right now.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> If I have a problem with somebody, I can tell them as I'm doing now. You got emasculated the last time you tried me, so I guess now you're too scared to pop off at the mouth again.
> And I never mentioned my school in this thread.


You did in another thread, and I actually had to Google what you put down to figure out what you were saying. Don't remember the thread or anything as it was a while ago. Just had to put that as food for thought about your "big-shot graduate program." :rofl

Emasculated me? Not sure how you did that when I'm talking to you right now. You have yet to start with me until now so we've had little to say. And this little "cosign" thing you are talking about is pretty much done by everyone on the forum, including you. It's funny how you're talking shit about the VERY thing you do as well. See, I really don't see the benefit of talking shit to you. It all ends up with you saying stupid shit and thinking you've one-upped me. It's like talking to a brick wall, really. No point in arguing and wasting time.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Alright alright stop arguing and resume shitting on this era please.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> I had another thought the other night. I think a point against the idea that sports medicine and modern nutrition account for longevity of the current greats doesn't necessarily add up, because lots of young champions and contenders are not lasting even _as long_, despite having the benefit of access to those resources AND the advantage of youth. Some that come to mind:
> 
> Kelly Pavlik
> Juan Diaz
> ...


I think charachter, mental toughness, shitty diets and addictions have a lot to do with these. Think Pavlik could still be a force to be reconned with if he stayed of the booze. Taylor just has bad luck and I rate him pretty high in his prime, he was a very solid fighter, just a very short prime, ortiz had no mental toughness (not shitting on him , just not the mental toughness that a world champion level/elite fighter needs). A semi-famous boxing quote applies here I think: 'boxing is 90 percent mental and 10 procent physical, but the physical aspect has to be 100%'. (shitty spelling, had a few beers)


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Montero said:


> I put Manny around #8 p4p and I'm not even sure that he's a top 5 at 147lbs; he's not a true WW.


What did the rest of the list looked like? I had Pac pegged at #3 or #4 p4p. Only Wlad, Ward (inactive, so i didn't counted him after a while) and Gonzales could be ranked ahead of him before the bout. And maybe Rigo if were talking about skills but his opposition in recent bouts wasn't great.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> I think charachter, mental toughness, shitty diets and addictions have a lot to do with these. Think Pavlik could still be a force to be reconned with if he stayed of the booze. Taylor just has bad luck and I rate him pretty high in his prime, he was a very solid fighter, just a very short prime, ortiz had no mental toughness (not shitting on him , just not the mental toughness that a world champion level/elite fighter needs). A semi-famous boxing quote applies here I think: 'boxing is 90 percent mental and 10 procent physical, but the physical aspect has to be 100%'. (shitty spelling, had a few beers)


It's definitely a big factor. They are related because your confidence is related to your ability, and your ability is related to your IQ, which depends in large part on the variety of skills you have. Some of these guys like Juan Diaz and Lopez had lots of heart, but couldn't adapt and paid the price.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> You did in another thread, and I actually had to Google what you put down to figure out what you were saying. Don't remember the thread or anything as it was a while ago. Just had to put that as food for thought about your "big-shot graduate program." :rofl
> 
> Emasculated me? Not sure how you did that when I'm talking to you right now. You have yet to start with me until now so we've had little to say. And this little "cosign" thing you are talking about is pretty much done by everyone on the forum, including you. It's funny how you're talking shit about the VERY thing you do as well. See, I really don't see the benefit of talking shit to you. It all ends up with you saying stupid shit and thinking you've one-upped me. It's like talking to a brick wall, really. No point in arguing and wasting time.


I wasn't even accepted into any graduate program at that time as I just got accepted 2 weeks ago, but good try though.

And you're only talking to me now because I called you out. You've been hiding around and wanted to do it plenty of times, but bitched out. You're probably afraid I'll ask you to post an uglyass picture of yourself again. And I've noticed you cosigning plenty of times in the past whenever somebody else wants to talk shit to me. I have been mostly leaving you out of it because honestly you're not as big of a prick as you used to be. If I cosign on what somebody says, that's because I'm already talking shit to that person in the thread, like if I cosign what Tommy says about FleaBrain. Go waste time somewhere else son


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> It's definitely a big factor. They are related because your confidence is related to your ability, and your ability is related to your IQ, which depends in large part on the variety of skills you have. Some of these guys like Juan Diaz and Lopez had lots of heart, but couldn't adapt and paid the price.


 @Montero made a good point earlier about the 122-126 division and it made me think about what @Drew101 said as well about the divisions even lower than that. It's a common theory that the reason American heavyweights aren't as good as they were in the past was because they're playing in other sports now as a result of boxing's dwindling popularity. Maybe this phenomenon is ranging to even more division than we thought. That could also explain @SJS20's observation that the welterweights nowadays are so much shorter.

If you're 5'4 and 122lbs, there aren't many athletic options for you realistically. A 5'10 147lb Sugar Ray Leonard could either box or he could gain some muscle and become the next DeSean Jackson or Darrelle Revis. Other countries have the same problem, but to a lesser affect I'm sure. Look at the best American heavyweight in Deontay Wilder. He had a scholarship for football and the only reason he boxed was because he got his girl pregnant and his daughter had health problems.

Even welterweights Errol Spence and Shawn Porter are former football players turned boxers. They luckily converted at a young enough age. Everything else that has been mentioned about the trainers, amateur system, etc are all a very large part of it and effect the lowest of divisions as well. The growing competition from other sports is in my opinion accounting for the difference between the higher weight divisions and the lower ones


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> I wasn't even accepted into any graduate program at that time as I just got accepted 2 weeks ago, but good try though.
> 
> And you're only talking to me now because I called you out. You've been hiding around and wanted to do it plenty of times, but bitched out. You're probably afraid I'll ask you to post an uglyass picture of yourself again. And I've noticed you cosigning plenty of times in the past whenever somebody else wants to talk shit to me. I have been mostly leaving you out of it because honestly you're not as big of a prick as you used to be. If I cosign on what somebody says, that's because I'm already talking shit to that person in the thread, like if I cosign what Tommy says about FleaBrain. Go waste time somewhere else son


I can bring up the thread you mentioned it in (something about the college you graduated from and what program you wanted to do), but I have a life. I'm not one to sit and research through your post history.

And yeah, you do cosign when someone talks shit to me too. Please, what you are insulting me about you do the same shit, and you've just admitted it too. I'm not the dumbass that tried to out someone but instead outed myself, and in the same fucking thread which holds an exact example. Seriously, can it get anymore embarrassing? atsch

Just keep trying to twist it around, brah. It'll make sense somehow...

About the picture. Umm... are you confused about something because this is a boxing forum, not plentyoffish.com (or however that website goes). Are you trying to fuck me or insult me? :rofl

Yeah, I just outlined it in my post that I'm talking to you because you're directly talking to me. Why the fuck else would I need to talk to you? You really think I should be stalking you and insulting you every chance I get? FFS, man, you need to take a long year off this forum or something because what you just said sounds like you think about me 24/7. :verysad


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

@MichiganWarrior, could you imagine Desean's handspeed?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> I can bring up the thread you mentioned it in (something about the college you graduated from and what program you wanted to do), but I have a life. I'm not one to sit and research through your post history.
> 
> And yeah, you do cosign when someone talks shit to me too. Please, what you are insulting me about you do the same shit, and you've just admitted it too. I'm not the dumbass that tried to out someone but instead outed myself, and in the same fucking thread which holds an exact example. Seriously, can it get anymore embarrassing? atsch
> 
> ...


Don't bother looking for the thread because I haven't even graduated with my bachelor's yet. Great memory though :lol:

and I didn't out myself for shit. Do I need to repeat what I said and my initial point? You don't have the balls to confront me or say anything to me, so you just cosign what others have to say. Me, I'll cosign with somebody else when they talk shit about a person I'm already talking shit to at that same time. You can use this same thread as an example. 
And you said I was Donald Sterling, so I posted a picture of myself. I asked you to do the same, but then you got ashamed because you couldn't find a picture that didn't include your jelly rolls ops. You also where afraid I'd expose you as a Filipino instead of Mexican.

Whenever anybody else wants to insult me, you like to giggle at their post and slap their ass. Why not say whatever you have to say to me? If somebody else is talking shit to you, I want cosign what they're saying unless me and you are getting into it also.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> @Montero made a good point earlier about the 122-126 division and it made me think about what @Drew101 said as well about the divisions even lower than that. It's a common theory that the reason American heavyweights aren't as good as they were in the past was because they're playing in other sports now as a result of boxing's dwindling popularity. Maybe this phenomenon is ranging to even more division than we thought. That could also explain @SJS20's observation that the welterweights nowadays are so much shorter.
> 
> If you're 5'4 and 122lbs, there aren't many athletic options for you realistically. A 5'10 147lb Sugar Ray Leonard could either box or he could gain some muscle and become the next DeSean Jackson or Darrelle Revis. Other countries have the same problem, but to a lesser affect I'm sure. Look at the best American heavyweight in Deontay Wilder. He had a scholarship for football and the only reason he boxed was because he got his girl pregnant and his daughter had health problems.
> 
> Even welterweights Errol Spence and Shawn Porter are former football players turned boxers. They luckily converted at a young enough age. Everything else that has been mentioned about the trainers, amateur system, etc are all a very large part of it and effect the lowest of divisions as well. The growing competition from other sports is in my opinion accounting for the difference between the higher weight divisions and the lower ones


Yeah that's a good point. I wonder if boxing could ever compete with those kinds of avenues.

Although that leaves the poorer countries. They're still producing talent, but where are the Vargas and Tito types (Valdez and Verdejo I guess but they're too young)? I suppose the decline of boxing in the US has made the economic incentive lesser for top trainers and so knowledge of instruction was lost.

Which makes me wonder, why has its popularity constantly dropped? Is it the development PPV market? What happened to household names? The household name is virtually extinct. Not even Manny or Floyd are known by the average North American. Why?

Also, do the top trainers of today have proteges? Roach has Marvin, he seems alright. What about Nacho? Naazim? Garcia? John David Jackson is an interesting new player on the scene.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Yeah that's a good point. I wonder if boxing could ever compete with those kinds of avenues.
> 
> Although that leaves the poorer countries. They're still producing talent, but where are the Vargas and Tito types (Valdez and Verdejo I guess but they're too young)? I suppose the decline of boxing in the US has made the economic incentive lesser for top trainers and so knowledge of instruction was lost.
> 
> ...


Personally I think PVV is the main reason, 100 dollars is just a lot to ask to fans and cuts out people from watching the sport live or they have to rely on livestreams. For example even if I wanted to pursache Pac vs May I couldn't because i'm from mainland Europe, so have to be relient on streams. PVV just cuts out a huge market of potential fans of the sport.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Yeah that's a good point. I wonder if boxing could ever compete with those kinds of avenues.
> 
> Although that leaves the poorer countries. They're still producing talent, but where are the Vargas and Tito types (Valdez and Verdejo I guess but they're too young)? I suppose the decline of boxing in the US has made the economic incentive lesser for top trainers and so knowledge of instruction was lost.
> 
> ...


oh yeah I didn't think about the Vargas and Tito types. Puerto Ricans have baseball to defer to, but that shouldn't account for them only having 1 champion right now or 2 if you count Danny. Same with Mexico. They're still very strong, but do they really compete with the Morales, Barrera, Marquez trio? That could be going in a cycle and Valdez, Estrada and Canelo emerge to become greats. I guess that's part of the issue. We don't know what's permanent and what's just the result of a slump in this ever changing roller coaster.

For the lack in popularity, I'm guessing the ppv model and network TV issues was what sped that up. Hopefully PBC can be a solution to that. I never knew how big of an issue that was until recently when I got the prespective of older fans who used to watch fights on ABC and NBC


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Don't bother looking for the thread because I haven't even graduated with my bachelor's yet. Great memory though :lol:
> 
> and I didn't out myself for shit. Do I need to repeat what I said and my initial point? You don't have the balls to confront me or say anything to me, so you just cosign what others have to say. Me, I'll cosign with somebody else when they talk shit about a person I'm already talking shit to at that same time. You can use this same thread as an example.
> And you said I was Donald Sterling, so I posted a picture of myself. I asked you to do the same, but then you got ashamed because you couldn't find a picture that didn't include your jelly rolls ops. You also where afraid I'd expose you as a Filipino instead of Mexican.
> ...


It's not really memory. Only that this forum matters so little to me that I don't treat every thread like a final exam.

As I said, I could post where you did the same cosign shit. We didn't even have a conversation at the time. I won't do it because I'm not about to scroll through threads. You just had to wiggle your way out of outing yourself like an idiot. That's enough for me, really.

It's also hilarious how you go on and on about the Filipino shit when I've done nothing or said anything that would make me seem even remotely Filipino. It's really a lost cause. You haven't given any evidence that outs me as a Filipino. I'm still waiting for that too. No pictures, nothing of me speaking Taigalo (or however you spell their language), and nothing of me knowing anything about Filipino food. Absolutely no evidence. Usually, in academics, you have to bring up evidence to make a claim. Hmm... maybe that's why I had to Google that college you were talking about.

I also only said that you were Donald Sterling because you were being a double-standard having racist. I didn't say shit about how you looked like him or anything. I already knew you were fucking black before from your discussions. Why the fuck would you even think I meant you looked like him? You were the dumbass that pointlessly put our your photo when it wasn't even part of our conversation. This is exactly why it's a lost-cause arguing with you. The more I talk to you, the more I too wonder if you have that extra chromosome.

Now, how about instead of fantasizing about how I look you just move on. It's seriously painfully having some grown ass man beg me for a photo on a boxing forum. I mean seriously. This is about the most pathetic, homosexual thing you could do to another man.

I'm not sure how anyone couldn't resist laughing at that extra chromosome thing. And yes, you fairy, everyone on this forum has done it at one point. It's nothing to whine like a little girl about, but I find it funny how much it bothers you and how little it bothers me when you do it. As I said, you need to take a long, hard look at your life. It's pretty fucking pathetic to be honest.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> oh yeah I didn't think about the Vargas and Tito types. Puerto Ricans have baseball to defer to, but that shouldn't account for them only having 1 champion right now or 2 if you count Danny. Same with Mexico. They're still very strong, but do they really compete with the Morales, Barrera, Marquez trio? That could be going in a cycle and Valdez, Estrada and Canelo emerge to become greats. I guess that's part of the issue. We don't know what's permanent and what's just the result of a slump in this ever changing roller coaster.
> 
> For the lack in popularity, I'm guessing the ppv model and network TV issues was what sped that up. Hopefully PBC can be a solution to that. I never knew how big of an issue that was until recently when I got the prespective of older fans who used to watch fights on ABC and NBC


Well this loop on the roller coaster is taking a historically long time. As we both said, we usually have torches snatched by now.

Yeah I mean just think of who was a celebrity. I mean a true crossover celebrity. Our top guys aren't even recognizable. If I went around with Floyd's face on a picture and asked people who he was, a lot (if not most) wouldn't know. Let alone more rural or suburban areas.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Mexi-Box said:


> It's not really memory. Only that this forum matters so little to me that I don't treat every thread like a final exam.
> 
> As I said, I could post where you did the same cosign shit. We didn't even have a conversation at the time. I won't do it because I'm not about to scroll through threads. You just had to wiggle your way out of outing yourself like an idiot. That's enough for me, really.
> 
> ...


lol no way I'm reading all of that.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Well this loop on the roller coaster is taking a historically long time. As we both said, we usually have torches snatched by now.
> 
> Yeah I mean just think of who was a celebrity. I mean a true crossover celebrity. Our top guys aren't even recognizable. If I went around with Floyd's face on a picture and asked people who he was, a lot (if not most) wouldn't know. Let alone more rural or suburban areas.


that is true, about how long this slump has been. For example at welterweight, we had Paul Williams, Antonino Margarito, Miguel Cotto, Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao there 6 years ago. 
After that it dipped with Victor Ortiz being ranked number 3 behind Mayweather and Pacquiao. The title holders were Pacquiao, Ortiz, Senchenko and Zaveck.

It has picked up again with Thurman, Porter, Maidana, Khan, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Bradley, and Brook. Yeah it's better than it was a few years ago, but the highs aren't peaking high enough anymore.

And I think the majority of people know Mayweather and Pacquiao. Floyd has about 5.7 million twitter followers where only 6 basketball players have more in Lebron, Kobe, Carmelo, Shaq Durant and Dwight Howard. Then he has more followers than any NFL player. That may not be the best indication of popularity, but it's somewhat helpful. I think it shows that people would be interested in boxing if it were more available and advertised


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> lol no way I'm reading all of that.


what did you do to him to get such a long response?

reminds me of the long letters I'll write girls to emotionally fuck with them


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> that is true, about how long this slump has been. For example at welterweight, we had Paul Williams, Antonino Margarito, Miguel Cotto, Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao there 6 years ago.
> After that it dipped with Victor Ortiz being ranked number 3 behind Mayweather and Pacquiao. The title holders were Pacquiao, Ortiz, Senchenko and Zaveck.
> 
> It has picked up again with Thurman, Porter, Maidana, Khan, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Bradley, and Brook. Yeah it's better than it was a few years ago, but the highs aren't peaking high enough anymore.
> ...


Yeah good point. The 2nd and 3rd tier contenders are just dropping in quality. The names change, they never measure up. And as you said before, nobody ever ages and improves in that slot, they leave and a younger guy takes their place.

One thing I also noticed is, why the hell isn't the rest of the top 10 at welter sorting itself out? You have (in no order)

Maidana
Bradley
Thurman
Brook
Porter
Khan 
Guerrero 
Ali 
Alexander
Chaves/Rios

And most have yet to fight each other. A few have gotten it on, and I put Chaves/Rios at the bottom there to show that not even they are being picked by those above them. The hell. Sort it out. It's just been Khan/Porter-Alexander, Porter-Brook, and Thurman-Guerrero so far. The division is "deep" and yet nobody is trying to swim all the way.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> what did you do to him to get such a long response?
> 
> reminds me of the long letters I'll write girls to emotionally fuck with them


lol he has a problem with me, but was too scared to confront me about it. So I called him out on it, and I guess he's trying to get a lot off of his chest. I usually have about a 3 paragraph limit until my attention fades, especially if the author is a jackass 


Bogotazo said:


> Yeah good point. The 2nd and 3rd tier contenders are just dropping in quality. The names change, they never measure up. And as you said before, nobody ever ages and improves in that slot, they leave and a younger guy takes their place.
> 
> One thing I also noticed is, why the hell isn't the rest of the top 10 at welter sorting itself out? You have (in no order)
> 
> ...


Oh man, that's a huge issue there. 140 is much better in that regard where Khan, Alexander and Bradley seemed to fight all of the top guys there and Garcia is doing the same now.

If you think back at the fighters from 6 years ago, all of those guys have fought at least 2 of the other fighters except Williams which wasn't his fault unless you include Kermit Cintron there.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> lol he has a problem with me, but was too scared to confront me about it. So I called him out on it, and I guess he's trying to get a lot off of his chest. I usually have about a 3 paragraph limit until my attention fades, especially if the author is a jackass
> 
> Oh man, that's a huge issue there. 140 is much better in that regard where Khan, Alexander and Bradley seemed to fight all of the top guys there and Garcia is doing the same now.
> 
> If you think back at the fighters from 6 years ago, all of those guys have fought at least 2 of the other fighters except Williams which wasn't his fault unless you include Kermit Cintron there.


Yeah exactly, you can clearly track the connection between them all. These guys are just floating stacked on top of one another. And how long would it take to sort them out? Boxing already moves slowly. One thing that might be good about May/Pac retiring is they stop holding out for that one pay day or looking out for that one good performance that earns them a date. Man I want 1 belt per division so badly, I hope Sulaiman works it out.


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

I dunno about @Lunny but I think I speak for myself and Lunny when I say more passing of torches are needed.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> One thing I also noticed is, why the hell isn't the rest of the top 10 at welter sorting itself out?


I get the impression some of them do not want to risk a loss, even if it's against another top ranked WW, for fear of losing out on the FMjr sweepstakes. There's absolutely no reason for Khan - Brooks - Thurman - Bradley to not fight. None at all.


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> I get the impression some of them do not want to risk a loss, even if it's against another top ranked WW, for fear of losing out on the FMjr sweepstakes. There's absolutely no reason for Khan - Brooks - Thurman - Bradley to not fight. None at all.


Which is what pisses me off about 147lbs.

Not only is it overrated as fuck and weak as fuck (compare it to the early '00s and 90s, its laughable) but the top guys aren't fighting each other at all.

Its a fucking joke. Fuck this current welterweight era. Fuck it up its stupid ass.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Zopilote said:


> Which is what pisses me off about 147lbs.
> 
> Not only is it overrated as fuck and weak as fuck (compare it to the early '00s and 90s, its laughable) but the top guys aren't fighting each other at all.
> 
> Its a fucking joke.


The resident attention whore says WW is "gangsta!" :rofl

There are some excellent bouts to be made there. Instead we've had Khan v. a good JrWW, Brooks v. a decent, but untested domestic talent. Thurman v. a shopwork gatekeeper (At best).

It really is bad compared to a a decade ago.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Zopilote said:


> Its a fucking joke. Fuck this current welterweight era. Fuck it up its stupid ass.


:rofl


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> The resident attention whore says WW is "gangsta!" :rofl
> 
> There are some excellent bouts to be made there. Instead we've had Khan v. a good JrWW, Brooks v. a decent, but untested domestic talent. Thurman v. a shopwork gatekeeper (At best).
> 
> It really is bad compared to a a decade ago.


112lbs, 126lbs, 130lbs, and Cruiserweight is where its right now IMO.

Fuck Welterweight.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

ah yes the whore I left a crippled has crawled out her hole again.

Invite me over. I'll grab a sandwich from your fridge and have you calling me pops


Mal said:


> The resident attention whore says WW is "gangsta!" :rofl
> 
> There are some excellent bouts to be made there. Instead we've had Khan v. a good JrWW, Brooks v. a decent, but untested domestic talent. Thurman v. a shopwork gatekeeper (At best).
> 
> It really is bad compared to a a decade ago.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> ah yes the whore I left a crippled has crawled out her hole again.
> 
> Invite me over. I'll grab a sandwich from your fridge and have you calling me pops


Your attempts at insults are so lame.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

which makes them perfectly suited for you, a second hand smoke crackhead


Mal said:


> Your attempts at insults are so lame.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

This thread turned fucking pathetic.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

Yeah the skill level is dropping amongst the young fighters. I think its from there being less boxing gyms, less trainers around, less people into boxing. Someone growing up in the late 90s who is early 20s now, they would not have much to chose from in terms of gyms, compared to say the 70s and 80s. 

Floyd is an easy one, but if you look at say Morales vs Zaragoza, he was very skilled for a young fighter, knew how to apply pressure effectively and took his time boxing and breaking down zaragoza. Skill AND youth won him the fight, zaragosa could have beaten a lesser skilled young guy. 

The young fighters today are coming in lesser skilled and instead of early 20s fighters beating the old guys as was the norm with say Ali, Tyson, Leonard, DLH, Mayweather, Morales ect... now you have it taking place around age 30 while they develop more skills over time.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

Indigo Pab said:


> I dunno about @Lunny but I think I speak for myself and Lunny when I say more passing of torches are needed.


:rofl Fuck your torches, you hear me? FUCK THE TORCHES


----------



## Thomas Crewz (Jul 23, 2013)

I was thinking the other day about how un-organised boxing is, and one aspect definitely contributes to boxing getting weaker as time goes on.

Youth development, especially in the 'west', is terrible. Every sport on the planet invests heavily in youth scouting and youth development. The top athletes are snapped up _very_ young by most top sports. Football (soccer) catches most its players before puberty. They have controlled and effective training and a clearly defined route to the top. It seems the same with American sports like Basketball and Am Football too. Compare that to boxing. How much money is invested in grass roots development from the top of the sport?

This wasn't so much of a problem back in the day. Partly because other sports hadn't implemented their youth development programs, and partly because boxing was still very much in the public eye. But from probably the 80/90's onwards most top sports have stepped up their game massively, actively seeking out the kids best suited to a career in elite level sport. Boxing talent levels have trended down since then as a result imo.

If you were a talented kid, or more to the point if your son was talented, what is the more enticing prospect? Pursuing a sport like American Football, which is organised with a clear development program and progression route, or boxing, where you entirely at the mercy of luck if you are born in an area with a decent gym (or even with a gym at all). Your chances of success depend on whether there is a dedicated boxing coach in your area who is willing to put in lots of time and effort for very little return.

This is yet another area where boxing would benefit from having a single organisation controlling the sport like NBA, NFL, FIFA etc. They would have the long term interest of the sport at heart, and that includes bringing through young talent.


----------



## The Kraken (Apr 19, 2014)

This reminds me why I left sherdog haha


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Chacal said:


> This thread turned fucking pathetic.


My apologies for my part. But this is typical when (P)eon misses his afternoon nap and warm tit to suckle.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lunny said:


> :rofl Fuck your torches, you hear me? FUCK THE TORCHES












"I'll throw him in the fire."-Lunny


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

@bballchump11 I thought of a different way to come about this.

Similar but distinct to the torch-passing angle of it, how common was it in prior eras for champions to hold the belt until they retired? They vacate to move up into new divisions all the time, but I mean retire from the sport. It seems increasingly common that we have to "wait" for someone to retire for the belts to be won. In other words, retirements that leave belt vacancies, rather than bouts that establish new lineages.

Lennox Lewis retired from HW as champion (got out at the right time)
Vitali retired owning his portion, and Wlad is expected to retire without taking another loss. 
Floyd is giving up his belts voluntarily and we're all asking "who will rule welterweight when he's gone".
Calzaghe went to LHW but just for 2 non-title fights. He remained unbeaten at SMW. Had to vacate.
Ward was stripped and Froch is in his place but if he stays at 168, I bet people will be betting on having to wait until he retires for a new SMW belt holder.

Basically belts left vacant due to true lineage being disrupted by an incapable generation. What do you think? Does this have merit as a modern phenomenon or is it too reaching?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

@Bogotazo ,

how would you feel about Crawford vs Pacquiao? That would be an in house, Top Rank fight, and it would most definitely be a torch passing fight since I would bet on Crawford winning that fight. There has been chatter about Crawford vs Pacquiao and I think it's a really good fight to make and would turn Crawford into a bigger star. What do you think? Pacquiao is still capable and a really good name, it would solidify Crawford's status as "one of the new guys."


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> @Bogotazo ,
> 
> how would you feel about Crawford vs Pacquiao? That would be an in house, Top Rank fight, and it would most definitely be a torch passing fight since I would bet on Crawford winning that fight. There has been chatter about Crawford vs Pacquiao and I think it's a really good fight to make and would turn Crawford into a bigger star. What do you think? Pacquiao is still capable and a really good name, it would solidify Crawford's status as "one of the new guys."


Yeah that would definitely be an opportunity for Crawford. I don't know if I'd favor him, but he has the tools and the mentality. On paper it seems very appropriate. It's not hard to see at all. Crawford comes in using his jab, quick on the trigger to counter, switches stances and surprises Pacquiao with aggression every now and then, while Pacquiao, now even older, starts to care less and takes less risks and come in more sloppy. I could see it.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Yeah that would definitely be an opportunity for Crawford. I don't know if I'd favor him, but he has the tools and the mentality. On paper it seems very appropriate. It's not hard to see at all. Crawford comes in using his jab, quick on the trigger to counter, switches stances and surprises Pacquiao with aggression every now and then, while Pacquiao, now even older, starts to care less and takes less risks and come in more sloppy. I could see it.


I consider Crawford to be the goods, a real elite fighter. If he fought Pacquiao it would put him on the right platform to snatch the spotlight. It's the closest thing to a "torch passing moment" that we could have in this era. Maybe if Floyd said fuck it and fought Thurman or Andrade but he won't. Think of how electric the crowd would be in Omaha if Crawford straight up schooled and stopped Pacquiao :lol:

It's also a very attractive matchup stylistically. I'd like to see it.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I consider Crawford to be the goods, a real elite fighter. If he fought Pacquiao it would put him on the right platform to snatch the spotlight. It's the closest thing to a "torch passing moment" that we could have in this era. Maybe if Floyd said fuck it and fought Thurman or Andrade but he won't. Think of how electric the crowd would be in Omaha if Crawford straight up schooled and stopped Pacquiao :lol:
> 
> It's also a very attractive matchup stylistically. I'd like to see it.


Yeah it's a very good fight to make. I'm with you.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jun 8, 2013)

Agreed. It's all about marketing now and making the most money, not about taking the biggest fights and proving you are the best.


----------



## Drew101 (Jun 30, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Alright alright stop arguing and resume shitting on this era please.


But it's not *that* bad! :bart


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Drew101 said:


> But it's not *that* bad! :bart


To me boxing at its worst is still great. Probably the worst of the "modern" era though.


----------



## Boogle McDougal (Jun 8, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> To me boxing at its worst is still great. Probably the worst of the "modern" era though.


Even at its worst, it's the only sport I give a toss about. The other sports are just games.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> @bballchump11 I thought of a different way to come about this.
> 
> Similar but distinct to the torch-passing angle of it, how common was it in prior eras for champions to hold the belt until they retired? They vacate to move up into new divisions all the time, but I mean retire from the sport. It seems increasingly common that we have to "wait" for someone to retire for the belts to be won. In other words, retirements that leave belt vacancies, rather than bouts that establish new lineages.
> 
> ...


good question. Rocky Marciano obviously retired with the title, but it's hard to think of many other examples current and in the past that you haven't mentioned. Chris John was close to doing it until he lost to Vetyeka. Ivan Calderon was another. These are from those lower division that we mentioned earlier that seemed to be less affected by the declining in talent. Then Donare vs Walters and Rigo could be other ones and Narvaez vs Ionue who never lost at that weight class.

See I was able to give many examples in the lower weight classes from the past few years, but not many in the higher weights, which I think does give ammo to your point.


----------



## Phantom (May 17, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Yeah I know this is obvious to some, but I feel the need to vent about it. The most recent realization came after May 2nd. Mayweather outclassed the number 2 p4p fighter in the world (depending on how and if you rate Ward), and proved he's the best of this generation. There were a few consequences of that though. A 38 year old man is the lineal champion at 147 and 154 and he holds 5 of the 8 major belts at both of those divisions. Now everybody thinks he's in a class of his own and nobody can defeat him 154 and below. If nobody steps up in the next 4 years, Mayweather could possibly become the fighter of the decade of the 2010-2019 years. The sad thing is that this current Mayweather is nowhere near his peak.
> 
> Mayweather in the past before the constant hand issue and the slower reflexes was a different animal. How would you imagine a fight between a 5'10 power puncher and Mayweather nowadays?
> 
> ...


How about even 10 years earlier....the 70's...my favorite decade. Want to *really* make today's era look bad?


----------



## Boogle McDougal (Jun 8, 2012)

Frankly it's all been downhill after Jem Mace and Boston Tom McMustache


----------



## bedders (Jun 6, 2012)

The older guys who've been around over the last few years - Morales, Pacquiao, Mayweather, Calzaghe, Wlad, Hopkins and so on - I think they represent a great generation. My worry is what is coming up behind. Khan? Bradley? Wilder? Canelo? Broner? I'm not even truly convinced with the Golovkin buzz if truth be told. I think there's a real dip with the next wave.


----------

