ReEvaluating Past Greats (In regard to Eastern Euros)

[Toney616]

Would things have been different had Eastern Euros been competing 20 and 30 years ago? The evidence certainly suggests so.

What evidence is that? You do know that fights back then were 15 rounders, how many fighters of today do you think could have fought that many rounds?

[Toney616]

Would things have been different had Eastern Euros been competing 20 and 30 years ago? The evidence certainly suggests so.

If your a massive fan of euro fighters, then good for you. What I dont understand is this insistence of contining to try and put down great fighters of the past, like Ali

[wmute]

1) In the 1950s, 60s, 70s, etc Boxing was much less competitive in terms of sheer numbers. The actual size of the talent pool was less. Today, there are 17 weight divisions each with 1,200 boxers per division according to BoxRec. In the 1950s, you had only 8 weight divisions with maybe 500 boxers per division.

This is the only interesting part of your post. Please provide precise numbers and the source for them. Without a source, this part is trash like the rest of your post.

[StarshipTrooper]

We already know how Eastern Euro Heavyweights would do back then: They were getting KTFO at the Olympics by Americans like Peter Rademacher.

Poet

[Die Antwoord]

We already know how Eastern Euro Heavyweights would do back then: They were getting KTFO at the Olympics by Americans like Peter Rademacher.

Poet

The best boxers in Eastern Europe were'nt boxing back then, it wasnt a big priority. The smaller lightweight guys were doing gymnastics or figure skating. The bigger guys were all either playing hockey or in the army. Thats where all the great boxers were back then. Isn't that what we hear happened to American boxing?

[mrboxer]

*First of all, this thread is not intended to be impolite, or racist. So lets all be mature, and talk about things civilly*

It's no secret the vast amount of success that Eastern Euros have had in pro boxing in the last 10 years.

As of today, Eastern Euros essentially dominate heavyweight and cruiserweight divisions. There is a very strong Eastern Euro presence in Super Middleweight, Middleweight, and there is notable presences in Light Heavyweight, Light Middleweight, and so on. Not to mention Eastern European and overall nonAmerican success in the amateurs has been increasingly proliferant for over 20 years.

It would be entirely accurate to suggest today that Eastern Euros are perhaps more successful than Americans, many of which are black.

When people talk about great boxers of history, many times they focus on Black American boxers from the past.

There is a couple problems with this, namely;
1) In the 1950s, 60s, 70s, etc Boxing was much less competitive in terms of sheer numbers. The actual size of the talent pool was less. Today, there are 17 weight divisions each with 1,200 boxers per division according to BoxRec. In the 1950s, you had only 8 weight divisions with maybe 500 boxers per division.

So, we are dealing with a much small talent pool when looking at fighter's from the past. Boxing was less competitive in the past, in terms of sheer numbers.

2) In the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s etc Boxing was restricted to only a few countries. There were no Russians competing, there were no East Germans competing, there were little Cubans competing, there were no Ukrainians competing. This changed after the fall of the Berlin Wall. At this time, it was only Black Americans fighting other Americans, or British. The odd Italian or Western German. But no Eastern Euros whatsoever. Americans did not have to fight Eastern Euros in this time period. Boxing was not a global sport.

3) People have an erroneous time-bias tendency to assume that "things from the past were better". That is to say, that what is viewed today as being good. 5 years from now, when looking back, people will overexaggerate and say "was great". This is a natural time bias to have, but we should be aware that athletes always improve with time both physically and theoretically. This is why world records are always being broken.

When people talk about Muhammad Ali, Sugar Ray, Earnie Shavers etc. We fail mention that these guys were champions in a time when boxing was relatively non-competitive and confined only to USA and Commonwealth Europe.

Times have changed, and boxing has become much more global.

Would things have been different had Eastern Euros been competing 20 and 30 years ago? The evidence certainly suggests so.

nothing would of been different,the best boxers come from either the usa or canada,

[StarshipTrooper]

The best boxers in Eastern Europe were'nt boxing back then, it wasnt a big priority. The smaller lightweight guys were doing gymnastics or figure skating. The bigger guys were all either playing hockey or in the army. Thats where all the great boxers were back then. Isn't that what we hear happened to American boxing?

The Olympics were a propaganda vehicle for Eastern Bloc countries: They wheeled out their best and most 'roided for them. Not to mention that Eastern Bloc athletes were proffesionals in everything but name. Try again Junior.

Poet

[Die Antwoord]

The Olympics were a propaganda vehicle for Eastern Bloc countries: They wheeled out their best and most 'roided for them. Not to mention that Eastern Bloc athletes were proffesionals in everything but name. Try again Junior.

Poet

The olympics were only priorities in certain sports. Ie. Hockey was vastly more important than boxing, so were gymnastics, and figure skating. The other huge priority was the army which usually tried to accomodate for the olympics, but often was unable to. The Klitschko's father wanted to be a boxer for example, but couldnt because of his obligations to the army. Try again internet warrior.

[StarshipTrooper]

The olympics were only priorities in certain sports. Ie. Hockey was vastly more important than boxing, so were gymnastics, and figure skating. The other huge priority was the army which usually tried to accomodate for the olympics, but often was unable to. The Klitschko's father wanted to be a boxer for example, but couldnt because of his obligations to the army. Try again internet warrior.

Oh contrair.....Olympic boxing was hugely important to the Commie scum as it was and is a "prestige" event. As for Army obligations, the Soviet Bloc used universal consricption with every able-bodied male being eligable. People with certain valuable attributes were passed over all the time so that they were available for such uses as national sports teams. Talented Chess players where routinely given passes for Army services so they could concentrate on Chess for example. The only people who had "obligations" that actually meant anything were officers for obvious reasons, not the least of which was that officers are career military. Next.

Poet

[Die Antwoord]

Oh contrair.....Olympic boxing was hugely important to the Commie scum as it was and is a "prestige" event. As for Army obligations, the Soviet Bloc used universal consricption with every able-bodied male being eligable. People with certain valuable attributes were passed over all the time so that they were available for such uses as national sports teams. Talented Chess players where routinely given passes for Army services so they could concentrate on Chess for example. The only people who had "obligations" that actually meant anything were officers for obvious reasons, not the least of which was that officers are career military. Next.

Poet

no cite and the inability to spell the word "eligible" and the fact you spelled it phonetically makes me believe your post is trash. Wlad and Vitali's dad stated he wished he could have beena boxer but had other things he had to do. Oh and he was an officer and from Vitali's book it sounds like he didnt have much of a choice in that matter.