Disparity in talent in ALL divisions?

This thread stems from the p4p rankings that ReeD posted so i decided to look at the champs from the 80's and compare them to today's champs, i can't hardly find ONE champion today who could beat a champ from the 80's in ANY division, can you?

80's Today
Larry Holmes - Heavyweight VS Wladimir Klistchko
Dwight Braxton - Light Heavyweight VS Adonis Stevenson
Marvin Hagler - Middleweight VS Genady Golovkin
Wilfred Benetiz - Jr Middleweight VS Floyd Mayweather (Closest match IMO or you could move Floyd down one, against SRL)
Sugar Ray Leonard - Welterweight VS Adrian Broner
Aaron Pryor - Jr Welterweight VS Danny Garcia
Alexis Arguello - Lightweight VS Yuriorkis Gamboa
Samuel Serrano - Jr Lightweight VS Takashi Uchiyama
Salvador Sanchez - Featherweight VS Chris John
Wilfredo Gomez - Jr Featherweight VS Guillermo Rigondeaux

Make a case for a champ today, curious to see what others think because to me over 3/4 of these look like complete mismatches. You can even make a case for someone not on the list such as Manny Pacquio vs Salvador, Pryor, or Leonard, etc. Maybe it's just me, but it looks like the 80's was the greatest era for boxing? I know boxing divisions fluctuated and the Heavyweights weren't the best era for boxing in the 80's but overall, was the talent that much better?

 

80s guys win every match up.

 

Talent-wise 80s was probably the best era of the boxing overall, there were great fighters and memorable fights in nearly every weight class. The level of early 80s was perhaps the best of the decade, so being worse than that is not much of a disgrace.

Comparison like this is not entirely fair since it compares a guy from the 80s in his prime to the guy that fights right now (unless you pick an exact year) and it lumps the whole decade to one. For example, in '85 Pinklon Thomas is listed as the p4p top-10 as is Milton McCrory (both of course very good but not head and shoulders above everybody who is fighting now), and Larry Holmes is clearly not as good anymore as he was in '81.

So yes, obviously the era now is much weaker than that, but same goes with most eras and there were different levels inside the 80s too

 

Nothing good can come of this conversation

The site is clearly divided into people who believe the sport has declined dramatically over the last 20 years and those who think that is ridiculous... A million conversations have taken place, no minds have been changed, none ever will be changed

I'm with Hut except I think Gomez/Rigo is a great matchup (I don't think the decline south of 126 is all that pronounced if it even exists, frankly)

 

Only two of those matchups are intriguing. Benitez-Floyd, and Gomez-Rigo. But even in those matchups, the 80's guys win. Floyd at this stage is not good enough to beat a prime Benitez, not if we're talking about the version that schooled Duran. And ultimately, Rigo is too chinny to beat Gomez. The rest are easy to call, with the BIGGEST mismatch being Leonard-Broner. My God, Ray would execute Broner in violent/quick fashion.

 

Hey ROCCO!!!!!

 

I agree, but I still can't think of a fight that the modern fighter would win.

MTF

 

I think Rigo has the best shot out of all the modern fighters, he's a great in any decade, as is Floyd but he doesn't beat Benitez at 154.

Gotta say though, I'd fucking LOVE to see Leonard beat the living fuck out of Broner.

 

The 80's of course was much superior. Probably the best decade in boxing going from top to bottom.

However in terms of finding a champ from the 80's against today there are lots where today's guy would win or it would be close.

Within two minutes i found these, and this is just the WBC title holders.

Vitali Klitschko vs Trevor Berbick
Adonis Stevenson vs Donny Lalonde
Sergio Martinez vs Alan Minter
Floyd Mayweather vs Milton McCrory
Danny Garcia vs Bruce Curry

If you wanted to cherry pick further it wouldn't be difficult to make it appear that today's era is better if you just base it on one to one matchups.

 

You can do anything with names, stats, time periods. Paint just about any picture you like.

 

Gomez was Naturallly BIGGER than Rigondeaux, but he COULD Be Hurt Also...No, Rigodeaux Didn't Punch like Gomez Punched, but he Hit MORE than Hard Enough to Get Gomez OUT of There...



REED:will:

 

I like Rigondeaux. He has that same squashed face as Joe Louis, and the same, indolent, relaxed feel to him.

 

NICELY Done:hut:...

Toooo Often, "Ol' Timers" Make it Seem as if World Titles Changed Hands from 1 Great Fighter to Another Great Fighter...& Toooo OFTEN, Unbeknownst Boxing Fans Simpy ACCEPT it as the Gospel...As if EVERY Champion, in the "Good Ol' Days", Would Wipe their Asses w/EVERY Single Contemporary Fighter...

In Reality, You Can Dissect ANY Era of Boxing & Find Head Scratchingly AVERAGE Fighters, who Held World Titles...



REED:mj:

 

exactly. There s no denying that boxing is not all that presently, and that the talent in the 80s was way better, but its not as pronounced as some nostalgic makes it out to be.

And I know super middle didnt really existed in the 80s, but Ward would be competitive and beat a lot of the top 80s fighter around his weight

 

Actually I would love to see a prime Ray Leonard vs. Boner

 

Same, but i'd prefer a prime Mike Tyson vs Broner.

 

Broner isn't even the recognized Welter champ. If anybody, at the moment Timmy the head is. In which case, it should have been Leonard vs Bradley. Which is another huge mismatch. Ray would dispatch Timmy within 4-5.

 

Yeah but Broner deserves the beating much more than Tim.

 

Then shoulda said Broner vs Duran. Duran would beat him up worse than Leonard would. Ray would knock Broner senseless, and he'd do it early. It wouldn't be a beating, it'd be a blown out.

 

The disparity is made more dramatic of course by comparing an entire decade to a single year....

 

Wlad would beat Holmes and he would beat him clearly and fairly easily most of the time.

Braxton is very vulnerable to guys like Stevenson and Kovalev (who I would pick over Stevenson).

While I don't expect anyone to agree, I like Golovkin over Hagler.

Too many of the modern guys are still question marks, including Golovkin, Stevenson, and Kovalev, so it's really just a stroke the 80's topic.

The matchup that clearly favors today is the heavyweight matchup, imo. After that, whatever. Pick all the other 80's guys and it's easy enough to defend your pick, at least right now.

 

Holmes would knock Wlad out 10 times out of 10

 

True say actually, good point. The longer it goes, the better :bears:

 

No, you are being nostalgic

 

It is a much more even fight than anyone wants to admit. If Wlad is allowed to fight the way he fights now, he could well win it. Even if all clinching is prohibited, he would make Holmes work for it. Larry stryggled with much worse guys, even though their style was hotter than Wlad's

 

Wlad has KO LOSSES to Significantly WORSE Guys....



REED:mj:

 

wald pussy has ko losses to guys that Holmes would have easily beaten the dogshit out of

 

I hear what you're saying but I just think there's basically zero chance Holmes doesn't nail him and finish him.

 

Of course, and nobody is denying that Holmes is the clear favorite. Just that there are two sides in the coin, and seeing it as a complete mismatch is not rational