MODERN BOXERS: BETTER ATHLETES, WORSE FIGHTERS?

Comments · 43

• AS

  @ashthecanman · 13 hours ago · pinned

  Do you think modern boxers are better athletes but worse fighters?<br><br>I’ve got a lot more boxing videos coming, breaking down the science, training and some of the biggest debates in boxing.<br><br>If you enjoy this sort of content, subscribe. We’re getting close to 1,000 🥊<br><br>And let me know what you think 👇🏽

• AN

  @anul6801 · 2 days ago

  Joe Louis averaged 200 lbs in his prime. He was smaller than a modern cruiser...

  13

• NO

  @NorthStar9999 · 1 day ago

  Only discovered your channel yesterday, but such great videos! Straight to the point and concise, no bs or beating around the bush whatsoever. And, you hit on such important fundamentals that are so readily confused or misunderstood by people. Really love your work, please keep it up!

  4

• US

  @user-le3pg6dv8c · 2 days ago

  Great video mate. I think the GOAT who would destroy everyone in any era is hands down Sugar Ray Robinson. A monster 201 fight record with 174 wins, where he had a 91 fight unbeaten streak in the late 40s. Also fought countless HOFs and won against all of them (lost to a few then avenged those losses later). <br><br>I think boxing has shifted out of the cultural eye in most of the world compared to the 20th century. Back then everyone knew who the Heavyweight champion was, nowadays that is not the case (AJ being an exception if you ask people in the UK that question when he was champ). We also have to remember that back then fighters were not getting paid millions to fight, so they would fight nearly every week (hence some of the crazy fight records) to keep the lights on - it was a much more ‘working class’ sport compared to today. You can’t duck a challenger when you need to put food on the table (obviously a bit different being champion but the money isn’t what it is now). Additionally, the promoter structure that boxing has which stops these big fights from happening is a byproduct of the sport being originally held up by organised crime and match fixing. That 100% will still happen today but not at the very top like it used to. <br><br>Finally, I think based on the above, the mentality of the previous generation of fighters was different. They lived hard lives and it created tough fighters . Their training was pure sports specific conditioning so they could go for 12+ rounds.

  7

• TH

  @theHappyWanderer007 · 1 day ago

  Great video as per mate. <br><br>Il try and keep this short. <br><br>Old school grit in my opinion can&apos;t be defeated. <br><br>Someone fighting to get rich is a different fighter than someone fighting to get dinner. <br><br><br>In the James J Braddock era boxers were fighting once a week so they could afford to eat. <br><br>That poverty gives a man grit and spite that modern fighters can&apos;t immagine. <br><br>The most modern I can think of is Roberto Duran. Fought so he could get his fammily off the streets. <br><br>He had that grit and that spite. Fighting for desperation not luxury.

  9

• WA

  @WarioSaysSo · 1 day ago

  Agree. Modern boxers may be better athletes &nbsp;- But are worse boxers overall.<br>What was good then (Past till 1980):<br>+ Original 8 weight classses (sidenote, Cruiserweight is the ONLY legit add as it represents HW from Olympics, with SHW is HW in the PRO&apos;s)<br>+ Only 1 or 2 WC title belts allong with the Ring/Lineal title belt &nbsp;= MUCH easier for a possible unification.<br>+ Champions defended there titles more often &nbsp;= &nbsp;Today it is just 2 top, but back then it was near standard with at least 3/year.<br>+ The best possible fights happened &nbsp;= &nbsp;There was far less politics, no pathetic &quot;0&quot; protection, and if boxers had a beef, they went at each-other in the ring. It took months, not years.<br>+ Being Undisputed champion, especially in the HW, you had then the greatest sports title in the world &nbsp;= &nbsp;Much greater prestigue in the title.<br><br>What was bad then (Past till 1980):<br>- Lesser knowledge of concussions, and head traumas.<br>- The Mafia was to much involved on the big scene with obvious fixed fights &nbsp;= &nbsp;Yeah its still a shady sport but more cleaned-up then it was.<br>- A lot of more managers screwed there boxers off there earned prize money &nbsp;= &nbsp;Boxers was easily screwed and had to accept paying BS sums to managers and mobs.<br><br>What is good now (1985 till present):<br>+ Better health overall. Better medical knowledge.<br>+ Easier for a boxer to get a world title fight. with 4 WC belts out there and many weight divisions.<br>+ MUCH better casting of big boxing matches and better quality.<br>+ More international represented as it should. In the past, a lot of European countries and in the East was never seen or promoted and 9/10 champs was from the US. Now the sport is more global!<br><br>What is bad now (1985 till present):<br>- TO MANY weight divisions &nbsp;= &nbsp;Added more divisions that delute the division tallents and steal the best popssible fights to happen.<br>- TO MANY world title holders &nbsp;= &nbsp;Having 4 major orgs, the WBC, the WBA, the IBF, the WBO and the classing Lineal/Ring title belt makes it possible for up till 5 champions at same time (like current HW), <br> &nbsp; and that devalue greatly the recognition and only create public confision for casuals to know who is the best man out there.<br>-Champions defend there titles far to less. 1-2 fights/year is very meager and makes it impossible to have a great division case in the long run. Like Wlad&apos;s 9 year reign with 18 title defences was the last...<br>- Boxers today overall are acting like posers/pretenders. They spend more time on social media and/or talk about fighting rather then do it. All talk, No action.<br>- Boxers today avoid fighting the best opponents. All about that pathetic &quot;0&quot; protection and cherry pickings. It really hurts the sport.<br>- All these s<a href="https://www.youtube.com/hashtag/hit">#hit</a> worth of Exebition matches, yet people are dumb to pay for them instead of having real legitimate matches. It has to stop. FMJ is one of the biggest milkers ever on this BS.<br>- A lot of classic boxing techniques have near gone lost to time. Modern boxers are not as skilled in using body punches either in combinations.

  5

• AC

  @acorbaster1 · 1 day ago

  2 more points. In the past boxing was more popular in the sense that every other dude tried it. Today 1 in 10,000 parents will tell their kids: be a boxer. So the pool size of athletic tallent that went to boxing was way bigger. Few people tought much about brain damage if alternative to boxing is working in a factory or a mine. So even in the &apos;90 you still had fighters who would do sparring every day!! (J.Tony😅)These guys would be &apos;slow&apos; by the time they are 40. But they were better fighters than today&apos;s boxers. And people like Foreman is a proof of that. Nobody could even rock or KD a 45 y old version of his. And while &apos;40 and &apos;50s HWs were smaller. In the 60s and &apos;70s HW were already as big as they are today. Thus &apos;70s are recognised as the golden era of HW boxing. Imo, Ali, Foreman, Fraizer beat Joshua, Fury, Wilder.<br>Great vid.

  3

• 94

  @94462 · 1 hour ago

  I wouldn’t say Modern fighters are fitter though like you said at the start. Old school fighters were doing 15 rounds, modern fighters can barely do 8 rounds without gassing….Wink Wink 😉

  1

• LE

  @leog50510 · 21 hours ago

  My boring answer for most complete modern boxer is one of Shakur, Kabayel or Bam, but I think more people should find time to watch Fundora and Figueroa, they&apos;re good fighters. For older fighters that I think would be a nuisance for modern fighters...Lennox Lewis was a monster if he counts as older, and I assume Calzaghe counts even less, but him too.

  1

• MO

  @mozzax331 · 1 day ago

  i think its nuanced and you can give examples for both. when you get a fighter whos willing to fight hard opponents consistently, uses the data and modern techniques to their advantage and isnt one to cherry pick we get ATGs like usyk or inoue who youd struggle to find anyone in history to pick over them on their best day. but with the financilisation of boxing, moreso in the post mayweather and newer saudi era you see it going from sport to more business, and even tho weve seen this financial aspect across most/all major sports in the modern day, you dont see it in the same way. manchester city cant just choose to play burnley instead of arsenal lol. good video anyway, its very nuanced and individualised.

• NI

  @ninjaq7934 · 1 day ago

  I be deadass I think probably Joe Louis might get his ass beat today cuz he was a less than 200lbs or around 202 pounds so so idk how he’ll handle a prime AJ or prime Wilder or Usyk but honestly I think Louis still had a good chance of beating cause Joe had a lot of things and man he was different In his prime

  2

• PA

  @pasoking2483 · 2 days ago

  Love the video. I like how nuaced the take is. Regarding the modern vs old school, there is quite the trade off. Modern fighting is much safer and allows for less medical complications and more longevity due to the ‘ducking’ and infrequent fighting. The trade off is less grit and less appealing competition. The athletes won’t be as battle tested, however they would be healthier at baseline.<br>I also agree with the strength and conditioning. Fighting should be the primary focus. The S and C is important but there is nuance and variability depending of the fighter. Tailoring the style of fighting and emphasis depends of the fighter, their leverages, attitudes, time available to train, physiological advantages and disadvantages. Lots of that fight wisdom is made in rounds and sparring. To build fight IQ you have to learn and understand yourself and would your style using your unique traits and temperament