1981 compared to 2011

Some of you may have noticed I sometimes get really discouraged with the boxing scene today. :)

To me, it just isn't the same as when I was a young fan. Some misinformed folks try to label me as an "old time lover" and other such retarded and self-serving terms, but I cut my teeth as a serious boxing fan at a time when there was a legit future HOF fighter (or fighters) in many divisions and, in some cases, fighters that are among the very best ever.

In 1981 I was 18 years old and was in the process of making the jump from a teenager who liked watching the fights to a full time boxing fanatic. And it was a great to be a boxing fan.

Heavyweight - Larry Holmes
Cruiserweight - Carlos DeLeon
Lightheavy - Michael Spinks/Dwight Qawi (also Marvin Johnson)
Middleweight - Marvin Hagler
Junior Middle - Wilfred Benitez/Ray Leonard
Welterweight - Ray Leonard/Thomas Hearns
Junior Welterweight - Aaron Pryor
Lightweight - Alexis Arguello
Junior Lightweight - Cornelius Boza-Edwards, Rolando Navarette, Sammy Serrano
Featherweight - Salvador Sanchez/Eusbio Pedroza (also future champs Rocky Lockridge, Juan LaPorte & Azumah Nelson)
Junior Featherweight - Wilfredo Gomez
Bantamweight - Jeff Chandler/Lupe Pintor

And these are just the fighters at the top of the divisions. There were plenty of other quality fighters around as well. And also some future stars in the beginning stages of their careers (Chavez, Curry, Starling, McCallum, Rosario, Camacho, etc...)

And of course there was Duran, who at the time looked to be done as a headliner at this time before getting back in the mix two years later.

And the two welters who were head-and-shoulders above the rest of the division ACTUALLY FOUGHT to determine who was the best...they didn't spend years retiring or fighting over-matched opponents while robbing the sport of the fight.

I really didn't follow the divisions below Bantam, so I can't offer an opinion on them. if anyone has any insight into those divisions, I'd be interested to see it.

It really was a great time to be a fan. I don't know how many of the current posters were old enough to be serious fans at that time, I know Trplsec is around my age...but I'm not sure about anyone else.

I guess I'm just trying to make the point that when I say the overall quality of the fighters was better when I was young...it's the truth. When I look at boxing now in 2011 and then compare it to 1981 I find our current sport lacking. If I am discouraged, it's because I WANT the sport to be better, but I suspect it may never do so.

And I don't have much use for the "it's not so bad now" arguments. Grading fighters/fights on a curve doesn't work for me.

I'm still a boxing fan, but I find it harder and harder to find fighters and fights to get excited about.

I am interested in what folks HONESTLY think about this. I expect there will be some childish responses from the usual suspects (which is always a shame to see), but there are some folks whose thoughts I am looking forward to reading.

 

I don't see how anyone can objectively look at a comparison between the two eras and come to the conclusion that 2011 is better... I just don't get what people are unable to see here. I can only chalk it up to wilful ignorance or resentment... I find it hard to believe that the people here (who I have to assume have all watched 100s of fights) genuinely believe right now is a better time, that they could be so unable to accurately interpret what they see in the ring that they would say to themselves "Yeah, Khan is better or as good as Pryor... Martinez is as good as Hagler... Near 50 Hopkins is as good as Spinks or Qawi... Mayweather/Pac is as good as Leonard/Hearns... etc., etc."

I can't believe that anybody who knows the sport is picking the 2011 guy as a better fighter than the 1981 guy in pretty much any weight class... I just don't understand it, it's baffling to me

 

Incidentally, joe, this thread is going to be a huge fucking disaster, sad to say.

Neil is going to call you oddgay joe and tell you to leave the site if you don't like boxing

mIKE is going to crow about how you are ignorant and that according to BoxRec statisitics, there were more fights this year than in 1981 and that the sport has never been bigger

Winner By Choke will point out how superior athletes are now and how Victor Ortiz would have put Wilfredo Benitez in a casket

Irish will make some point that has nothing to do with anything that attempts to link you with Doug Fischer is some strange way, and find the worst possible fight or incident of 1981 and say "those were the days"

royjonesp4pno1 will say "ya'll old and shit" or something like that

Sly will find some way to tie it to Mayweather

Kauki will respond to Irish's posts with some long-winded and strange rant, but I will enjoy that part because I will read them aloud as Hannibal Lecter

The only thing to come of it will be the re-drawing of familiar battle lines; the true, jesuit believers who can not fathom that boxing is currently anything other than totally awesome... the guys who say "man, it just isn't" and are labeled as Bert Sugar (whose preferred time period would actually be more like the 1920s) ... The guys who think this is all just an illusion of American journalism will repeat their same opinions... The Floyd guys will ignore his shitty competition at wleterweight and pick him as the greatest ever... the Pac guys will do the same... THe topic is a microchasm of the site

 

What a list of champions that is. At least boxing has amazing rewatch value... those fights and fighters will never get old.

 

1981 was better, there are probably 5 guys around right now I would be confident could win titles against other titlists from the 1981 gang, or have fights against the best of their division and not be at all embarrassed.

Vitali/Wlad{Hvy}
Cunningham {Cruiser- preferably Adamek though}
Floyd {Welter}
Pac {Welter to Light Welter}
Juan Manuel Marquez {Lt Wt}

Gotta remember, 1981 is all of three whole decades ago. World has changed a lot in that space, no reason why boxing should have escaped change.

Its not all bad though. 5 years ago there were some still relatively fresh and talented guys, go back 8, well under one-third of the allotted time and you got Lewis, pre-Ruiz Roy Jones, Jirov, Toney, Joe Calzaghe, Hatton, Tszyu.

Also there is no 168lb division as of 1981, and there have been some pretty decent talents in that division and continue to be to the present day, so thats another factor to be considered.

Its also worth considering that by 1985, Holmes was finished, people were whining about Spinks, Ray Leonard was gone, Arguello was past it, etc.

Its just natural wax-and-wane of the sport. What makes it different today is we don't see the next "wax" coming anytime soon.

 

Hmm... impressive restraint

 

Well... you're kinda going off topic when you venture 5 to 8 years away from the times I was talking about. I wasn't taking about 2003...I'm talking about 2011. Why stop there...we could go back to 1999 as well..but that has nothing to do with my topic.

 

Dude, I am as realistic as the next guy. Its when certain SoD's from New York come online and say things like "7 out of 10 guys at Heavyweight are juicing" that I get rightly fucked off, or, "Vitali only wins fights cos he's bigger".........nobody here thinks that Bernard or Danny Green or Dawson or Pascal is going to go and do shit at 175 against guys who fight in prisons and things. Or that Khan is going to burst Pryors arse. Perversely, its the heavyweights who always seem to be that bit more capable of holding their own against their historical predecessors.

Also, as I say, the test is a bit misleading. A few short years AFTER 1981, the landscape had changed radically, and a few short years BEFORE 2011, there were some really, talented, dangerous dudes.

I'm not saying Hatton or Tszyu could beat Pryor or Arguello, but they would not embarrass themselves like Khan or Alexander would. Roy Jones might not beat all those guys at 175 but I give him a really good shot and much better than Dawson or Pascal or ancient ass Hopkins. 2003 Hopkins vs Hagler? Who knows. Bernard might just be savvy enough to go rounds and test Hagler.

 

I was just making a point, a few years either side and you get a radically different picture. I mean fuck it, why not have a 1971 vs 2011 thread and call it "Oh, Woe Unto Thee, Prize-Fighting, Abandon All Hope Ye Who Inhabit 2011"

 

Thats fair

 

Ugh. I knew you would just try to just twist things to suit your purposes. You bring up Roy Jones, but when was the last time he could seriously even be considered in the same league as Michael Spinks?

 

What the OP is saying is that the comparison between 1981 and 2011 is good reason to be depressed.

I say not so...that the picture is somewhat skewed, and I set out to demonstrate why.

This is met with anguish and clinical depression on a grand-scale. ::

 

1981-Ali retires
2011-Haye Retires

 

In 2003, 22 of the 30 years into the period you mentioned. What are my purposes? To promote Roy and Bernard? My point is this, there is a wax and wane in boxing, same as any endeavour. Perhaps it is unintentional, but you seem to have picked two points in time which throw up an exaggerated statement of decline in boxing. Move a few short years past 1981, and a few short years back from 2011, and the picture alters severely.

The critical factor today is not that we don't have the talent right now, its more that there is even less, it seems, coming down the pipe.

 

1981: A badly brain-damaged Ali is beaten up by a guy who would be obliterated by Mike Tyson in one round 5 years later.

2011: Haye retires.

Come on. You can spin results left and right and center.

1983: Ray Retires.

2013: Floyd beats Pac, Retires.

 

Great...more attempted misdirection from you. How did I know you would be like this??

If you want to change things to suit your arguement..then knock yourself out. But you are not doing a thing to refute anything I had to say by doing so.

If you need to go back 8 years to "make a point"...then all you are doing is making my point that NOW is a particularly low point for the sport. And...I don't see much going forward to change that. Do you?? Honestly???

If NOW isn't good...and things don't look likely to change...I don't see what your point is except to be argumentive.

 

Fixed.

 

It would be a stretch to say that things are going to radically improve, soon.

BUT.

In 1981, it would have been unforeseen that things would decline rapidly likewise henceforth.

 

We don't know that :nono:

 

I'd say 1985 still kicks the ass of 2011, frankly

 

finally this guy makes an actual boxing related post.

 

And we "know" what you had to say about it? I don't think so...

 

Ahhh...here is one of the usual suspects making yet another totally useless post.

 

i was complimenting you on actually contributing to this boxing forum with a boxing related post, for once.

 

bit of a backhanded compliment, surely you can see that

"You're not as ugly as I expected", you know?

 

agREED.

This supposed big drop off that Irish is going on about doesn't really exist...there were plenty of excellent fighters "a few short years later".

 

My point is thus: you can't pick ONE year, draw a straight line down through three decades, pick another year and draw a clear, purposeful conclusion.

There have been some massive spikes in the game over that period.

I mean, if you draw the same line from 1951 to 1981, you get the same picture, the same graph.

So basically boxing has been in decline since 1951.

 

I don't need any so-called "compliments" from someone who is one of the main reasons this forum is on a downward spiral. The biggest actual compliment you could give is to leave the topic and spare it any of your half-assed opinions or usual childish posts.

 

the truth is the truth. you may like the guy since you used to discuss boxing back in the day somewhere else. fact is, the guy rarely makes any insightful boxing related posts on this website. perhaps if he did, people would shit on him less.

 

Listen man, there's been an entire ERA of brilliantly talented 168lb dudes from the early 1990's right up to the present day. I'd say they all easily dominate the non-existent 168lb guys of 1981.