we dont accept!!!

[kamicazze]

we dont accept how good the curren crop of figters are! we always think passed fighters are better than the ones now! well joe calzaghe is the best smw of all time, as roy jones is the best lhw, and holyfield bste cw, and maybe mosley at lightweight, and even a case can be made for manny pacquiao, prince nasseem, and floyd mayweather but we r always caught up in the sugar ray robinson, marvin hagler, myth! granted ali was greatest hw ahead of marciano and louis! common just watch the fights and skill difference because of the different timeline! it shows

[StarshipTrooper]

we dont accept how good the curren crop of figters are! we always think passed fighters are better than the ones now! well joe calzaghe is the best smw of all time, as roy jones is the best lhw, and holyfield bste cw, and maybe mosley at lightweight, and even a case can be made for manny pacquiao, prince nasseem, and floyd mayweather but we r always caught up in the sugar ray robinson, marvin hagler, myth! granted ali was greatest hw ahead of marciano and louis! common just watch the fights and skill difference because of the different timeline! it shows

Okay. Here we have another young nimrod who thinks everything and everyone that happend before he became aware sucks. What on Earth makes you think that skill levels are better today than they were before? If anything todays fighters are LESS skilled because unlike the old-timers they don't take the time to learn their craft. Fighters today get title shots at 20 fights. Back in Robinson's day it wasn't unusual to have 50 fights before getting a title shot: 50 fights and most fighters today are hanging up the gloves. Have you ever seen Hagler fight let alone Robinson? If you have how can you possibly make a statement like that? Are you insane man?

Poet

[kamicazze]

i wasnt claiming taht they had no right 2 the mantle of being all time greats i was just pointing out we dont accept that the fighters of our ere are as great as! they have not had the same impacty on the sport but as fighter are equally if not better than their predececcors!! besides sugar was a welter at middle so he was good but that raises the question at how good the middles were then! lamotta was good but was sugar that far ahead and yea i have seen many of their fights and was impressed by some and very unimpressed by others! hagler had it! marciano and louis would have been head and shoulders above todays hw crop but against the ali and tysons they would have been no match! also wilie pep was very flat footed and had his hands low! i dnt know if the more amount of rounds they fought then contributed to this but i can spot more *****s in his armour than a pacquioa

[QuCongee]

also wilie pep was very flat footed and had his hands low!

I think willy pep was overrated to be honest. Sanchez would have beat him unmerciful. I bet Pacman would too.

[me2007]

if it were true, it would only be because todays fighters are standing on the shoulders of the giants of yesteryear.

I dont think it is true, although i do think some of todays fighters would do well back then, i think it works both ways.

I would question the heart of the average modern fighters though, some of the really old fighters fought to eat, not for new cars and diamonds.

[StarshipTrooper]

Things aren't always as they seem. Fighters of today really don't fight stylistically any different then they did in the past. There simply hasn't been any breakthroughs in boxing technique since the breakthroughs of the early twentieth century. Why the assault on Willie Pep? Ali in his prime fought with his hands down at his side and guess what? People STILL couldn't hit him. Techniquely Ali did everything WRONG but made it work because of his speed and quickness. Roy Jones was the same way o' yee of short memories. Willie Pep fought that way because he was a defensive wizard who put his hands down and move his head and upper body made his opponents miss. It's as simple as that. If you drop your hands and your opponents STILL can't hit you why not keep them down? You simple haven't watched enough Pep fights to see what was REALLY going on, just as you haven't seen enough prime Ali to see him doing it too.

Poet

[kamicazze]

hey i just cameup with a better opinion, if the fighters of old had been around today they would have faired well as their traing tachniques would have adapted! but we are all going to say the best fighters are from theera we grew up watching! but my point is - pazquioa would beat pep, same as hagler would beat sugar ray robinson!

[pedrito]

Is there any point in answering a guy who can't write properly? Chances are that he can't read properly either.

Man, in the first post you say:

"we r always caught up in the sugar ray robinson, marvin hagler, myth!"

Now you say:

"same as hagler would beat sugar ray robinson!"

Type up your posts slowly, think your sentences and read other peoples posts and then maybe someone will take notice of what your saying.

Oh yeah and can't refrain from posting this:

Sugar Ray Robinson: 200 pro bouts.

Manny Pacquiao + Holyfield + Floyd Mayweather Jr. + Calzaghe + Roy Jones + Naseem Hamed + Shane Mosley = 324 pro bouts

[kamicazze]

And your point is???

[them_apples]

Ignore Poet, he's a complete ******* who won't recognize any talent after the 1970's

As for the topic, I agree I think every era has it's share of good boxers and greats, some era's are more boring, but every era still has it's share of talent.