Why could past ATGs knock out guys 40 pounds bigger than them...

[Cardinal Buck]

Agreed. There are hardly any 21st Century fighters who would stand a chance against the best fighters from the 20th Century.

Skills are skills; they're apparent from watching video. There is nothing that a guy like Shane Mosley does that is in any way superior to what Joe Gans did, other than get knocked out.

Yes, because if there's one poor quality Shane has demonstrated, it's the ease with which he gets routinely knocked out.

[Cardinal Buck]

To answer the original question: (1) elite fighters are no longer paid in horse feed (2) athletic commissions are more competent.

[Bolo Punch]

Indeed, which is why guys like him are still amazing because they were so ahead of their own times thus they are highly ranked ATG's.

That's not how I see it, but okay.

Gans fought with more intensity than anyone today, bar none. And other than Benny Leonard and Roberto Duran, he'd walk through any lightweight that's come since him.

Johnson's relaxation in the ring is one of the many reasons he was so good.

What exactly is this based on? In any film of Gans his punch output is low and his footwork is only used if he needs it.

If you think Johnson survives even against the best of today's Heavyweight division, nevermind the greats from 70s-90s, you are very wrong, in my opinion.

[Humean]

Gans fought with more intensity than anyone today, bar none. And other than Benny Leonard and Roberto Duran, he'd walk through any lightweight that's come since him.

On what possible evidence can you base this upon? The video evidence for Gans is small and of poor quality.

Agreed. There are hardly any 21st Century fighters who would stand a chance against the best fighters from the 20th Century.

Skills are skills; they're apparent from watching video. There is nothing that a guy like Shane Mosley does that is in any way superior to what Joe Gans did, other than get knocked out.

What are these skills that you speak of? They sure as hell are NOT apparent from watching the video of fighters from that era. The way you sound I imagine you'd think Jesse Owens was faster than Usain Bolt if there wasn't a timing system to conclusively disprove it.

[Scott9945]

You cannot be serious. The fighters of the first few decades of the 20th century had no where near the skills of later fighters. The limited video of these fighters very clearly indicates this. To add to that the very thought that the earliest practitioners of a sport could be better than later versions is completely preposterous. Every other sport has seen improvements over time due to a variety of factors, I posted some in another thread a few days ago in response to your question. //krikya360.com/forums/sh...6#post13695526

There is a difference between greatness and how good a fighter was. Those all time greats that you list were the best in their day and because of this are rightly rated as all time greats but that does not mean they would be any good today. The idea that Ketchel could beat Mayweather even with a slight weight advantage is also ridiculous.

I do not subscribe to the view that boxing skills have declined, they have certainly improved since the first few decades of the 20th century. Whether they have improved since around the 30s or 40s onwards is more debatable but they have certainly not declined since then. American professional boxing has declined since the 50s vis-a-vis the rest of the world but boxing in general has not.

At 160 lbs I'd take Ketchell over Mayweather without a second thought. He was a killer who died right when he was hitting his prime. If he was allowed to weigh in the day before he'd have a huge advantage over Floyd, who won't even fight Canelo at 154.

[greeh]

On what possible evidence can you base this upon? The video evidence for Gans is small and of poor quality.



What are these skills that you speak of? They sure as hell are NOT apparent from watching the video of fighters from that era. The way you sound I imagine you'd think Jesse Owens was faster than Usain Bolt if there wasn't a timing system to conclusively disprove it.

What the **** does that have to do with boxing?

/greeh

[Humean]

At 160 lbs I'd take Ketchell over Mayweather without a second thought. He was a killer who died right when he was hitting his prime. If he was allowed to weigh in the day before he'd have a huge advantage over Floyd, who won't even fight Canelo at 154.

The comparison should be between Ketchel as he weighed on the night of a fight when he fought, not under todays conditions, and a version of Mayweather fighting at the weight he fights at on the night of the fight under todays conditions. In this scenario Ketchel would probably only have a slight weight advantage. Skill wise there is no comparison, Ketchel would probably not be anywhere near a champion at 160 today. Mayweather would beat him with ease.

What the **** does that have to do with boxing?

/greeh

My point was obvious, i'm not spelling it out to you if you have failed to understand such a simple point.

[Scott9945]

The comparison should be between Ketchel as he weighed on the night of a fight when he fought, not under todays conditions, and a version of Mayweather fighting at the weight he fights at on the night of the fight under todays conditions. In this scenario Ketchel would probably only have a slight weight advantage. Skill wise there is no comparison, Ketchel would probably not be anywhere near a champion at 160 today. Mayweather would beat him with ease

The only middleweight now that I would even consider against Ketchell would be Golovkin. Skill wise Floyd would be superior (as he always is), but power wise it's a whole different story. And once again, if Floyd won't even fight an unproven Alvarez at 154, how can you expect him to fight a real middleweight at 160? Unless he has as low of an opinion of Ketchell that you do I suppose.

[greeh]

The comparison should be between Ketchel as he weighed on the night of a fight when he fought, not under todays conditions, and a version of Mayweather fighting at the weight he fights at on the night of the fight under todays conditions. In this scenario Ketchel would probably only have a slight weight advantage. Skill wise there is no comparison, Ketchel would probably not be anywhere near a champion at 160 today. Mayweather would beat him with ease.





My point was obvious, i'm not spelling it out to you if you have failed to understand such a simple point.

Your point is **** and still don't have anything to do with boxing.

/greeh

[Humean]

The only middleweight now that I would even consider against Ketchell would be Golovkin. Skill wise Floyd would be superior (as he always is), but power wise it's a whole different story. And once again, if Floyd won't even fight an unproven Alvarez at 154, how can you expect him to fight a real middleweight at 160? Unless he has as low of an opinion of Ketchell that you do I suppose.

My conjecture is that Canelo will weigh more on fight night than middleweight Ketchel would. Ketchel's fighting weight at middleweight was probably somewhere between 160-165. Canelo will probably weigh between about 163-169. It is not so much that my opinion of Ketchel is low, he was the real deal in his time but that was what he was, a man of his time. Boxing has probably not improved as greatly as other sports over time for a variety of factors, the main one being the inbuilt limitation that weight classes possess. This is important because a big part of the improvement of athletes over time is that they have got bigger and heavier. Boxing weight classes have compensated for that somewhat. Yesterdays heavyweights are todays light heavyweights and cruiserweights.

In short, Canelo is probably bigger than Ketchel.