Willie Pep better defense than Floyd or Pernell? Bull.

[RodBarker]

Records have been beaten because of equipment and playing conditions. Golfers have better clubs and fairways to play on. Swimmer have suits that are proven to make them swim faster. Football has lighter equipment and artificial or manicured turf. Baseball has smaller fields and juiced balls. Skiing has better ski's and aerodynamic clothing. In track and field the track surface is always evolving giving it competitors advantages the athletes from other era's never had. The list goes on and on.

Mate if you think that sports science regarding conditioning stayed in the 30s while technology improved 10 fold , how can one go forward without the other nothing satays the same its either goes forward or backward thats just a fact of life no matter what you apply it to ,,,, I guess your inferring that Mackie Shilstone and his achievements with Michael Spinx, Rid**** Bowe, Roy Jones and Hopkins is really just a smokescreen for modern conditioning methods , I dont think so my friend

Its an odd concept where an old fella is telling a young fella things have improved in leaps and bounds in the young fellas time . I dont believe in the good ol days because your good ol days is now .

.

[BennyST]

2minutes qualifies ass half of the fight in this case. hahaha.

...and a knockout in the second round of a two division, future unified WW champ qualifies as a serious ass whipping. Get with it wanker. He lost the fight by KO in the second round. He got beat bad.

Oh yeah, and calling other people ****** when you can't spell 'as' is not something you should be doing too much of mate.

[BennyST]

One big thing that really pisses me off about this absurd and ****** argument is that it doesn't matter who would win head to head. You can't compare them head to head because they did fight in such different conditions and different eras. If you are going to compare them head to head you either have to imagine todays athletes going back to the older era or those athletes coming up to todays and using the same training etc etc.

You judge by who they fought, what they won and how good they were compared to their competition. Just as you say Mayweather is undefeated to day and much better than most others, Pep was also the same. He was a dominant force back in his era and was utterly superb skill wise. He was the Mayweather of that time and that, my foolish friends, is the only way you can compare them.

By saying that the training techniques are better, gyms are better, nutrition, etc etc you are saying that todays athletes have an unfair advantage. Being a relatively modern sport in terms of its entertainment value and popularity things have changed to the point where you can't judge the fighters today or yesterday against each other with the same standards. It's a useless, frustrating and simply pointless exercise in which fans of a Mayweather will vehemently argue that he would beat every fighter to fight even though the differences in the way everything was done is just too far.

One huge point to remember is that there was only one champ in a division. Today, there are four so the ranks of fighters are four times as diluted. Yesterdays champs would have to fight the best contenders and today, these contenders would have been one of the divisions other champions. So, if you think that a Pep type fighter beat all the top contenders of his day, it is the same thing as Hopkins beating every single champ in the middleweight division and owning every belt. There were not four different ranking systems. There was one and each and every guy that got to the top did so by beating the best fighters throughout that division, which would be the same as a fighter beating the top contenders in the WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO divisions and being a champ in all of those too.

Not only that but there were much, much less title fights. You look at the record of Jones today and after he won a title nearlyu every single fight he had was made into a title fight of some sort as it gave the specific ranking body more sanctioning money. So the records are so different as to be completely incomparable. Pep, who didn't have very many title fights compared to anyone today would still have actually beaten a hell of a lot more top contenders and fighters than most champs today too.

Being that the standards are so different today then you must think like this: If someone from yesteryear dominated their era over everyone else that trained in the same way they did, then with all the new techniques they would still be just as dominant today. That would not change. Everyone that trained that way in the older period would train with the new methods today but it would not change how good they were and how talented and how determined Pep would still be better than everyone else. Pep would still be abnormally quick, defensively brilliant and ring savvy. He would no doubt have a record the same as Mayweather's is and be a many division champion with about thirty to forty fights. Anyone that thinks differently just does not think about things correctly. You have to put things in perspective.

Robinson would still dominate if he grew up in todays era. He would probably go undefeated throughout his entire career and would have probably gone from somewhere around 130/135 all the way to 160/168 with the weigh ins and the ability to dry out and rehydrate.

See, the thing I don't get is that what makes it so great if you think Mayweather would beat Pep anyway? Not withstanding the fact that they didn't fight in the same divisions if Mayweather grew up in the old era he would have been great just as Pep was. If Pep grew up and fought in todays era he would have been just as great as Mayweather. He was naturally faster than everyone, slicker than everyone, had more ring smarts and just fought better. It would be the same today. You just take the athletes of old and bring them up with the training methods of today and they won't change. The best will still be the best and will still win but they will look the same as todays guys do. It's a useless argument that is gone about the wrong way by everyone arguing it here.

Pep was great. Mayweather was great. But, just as Mayweather is considered better than everyone today, Pep was considered better than everyone back then. If he fought today he would also be considered better than everyone because that's what he was. You don't put Pep in with other era without thinking about the changes he would go through. That's why the whole P4P thing is just a fantasy 'pound for pound' thing. You can never actually say who would win, you can only go by how great a fighter was and who he beat and the best would be the best in any era they fought in. That would never change.

[RodBarker]

Benny fair post , one thing you never mentioned is technique , I think the skills taught today both defensively and offensively are better across the board because the trainers have evolved with each generation of top trainer being taught by the best of the last generation which creates a natural evolution off better students , its one thing to say if they all had the same modern day conditioning benefits that they would be equal and in that sense they would because they fight as somebody mentioned earlier within a weight class , but the skills today have a more honed edge to them across the entire competition , your right you cant compare greats from different eras , but Im not focusing on Floyd vs Pep but on the 30s fighters in general compared to fighters in the 20th century , I think boxing has moved forward by quite a big step .

[JAB5239]

Mate if you think that sports science regarding conditioning stayed in the 30s while technology improved 10 fold , how can one go forward without the other nothing satays the same its either goes forward or backward thats just a fact of life no matter what you apply it to ,,,, I guess your inferring that Mackie Shilstone and his achievements with Michael Spinx, Rid**** Bowe, Roy Jones and Hopkins is really just a smokescreen for modern conditioning methods , I dont think so my friend

Shilstone is fine at his job. But using better nutritional knowledge to control and add weight through weight training is not the same as being better conditioned for the long haul. Conditioning is improved through activity and pat fighters were much more active for the most part. Jim Jeffries fought at the turn of the century. How many heavyweights today are as well conditioned of as athletically gifted as he was?

Its an odd concept where an old fella is telling a young fella things have improved in leaps and bounds in the young fellas time . I dont believe in the good ol days because your good ol days is now .

.

I haven't quite caught up to you, but Im sure Im a lot older than the average poster on these boards. I do believe this is another thread we're going to have to agree to disagree on as I see us going round and round yet again.

[studentofthegam]

Benny maaaaan, you wrote all that **** trying to get us to shut up. I made the thread so we could discuss. It is a forum which means we discuss opinions. short. sweet.

[Ascended]

look how much more advanced Floyd is in amateur angles/tech/fluidity/defense/timing

Floyd amateur

willie in his young years

Only lazy lunatics who watch highlights only said pep was better

pernell just like floyd way more advanced even as a amateur than the novice like pep