1981 compared to 2011

I have followed heavyweight much more than any other division and also there is much more fights between contenders available from heavyweight than any other division. Also, since heavyweight is supposedly in the worst condition of all divisions, we should get the best examples from there

But to mention another example: in late 80s or late 90s(I have seen the fight once so I am not sure) Lindell Holmes battled Carl Sullivan from IBF super middleweight title. I don't remember it being a particularly great fight, just a typical bout between contenders. These are the type of fights that are forgotten as time goes by, thus the memory we have from past decades is incorrect

 

This is what happens when he forgets his daily intake of metamucil. The old cunt.

 

i am also not understanding, it is like little girl who want to have pony but parent of girl buy donkey for her and she cry no i want pony even though donkey will do same thing

 

Fair enough... I just think you have to go beyond heavyweight to say boxing is just as deep now as it was then.

 

Good point.

 

::

 

Fucken exactly.

 

Attila knows this game

 

:laughing:

 

Really? This is the best you have to offer. You're not even all that good at being a douchebag. You definitely are one...but you are as bad at that as you are when you attempt to discuss boxing.

Poor Stafford...

 

Oh, wow...I never thought of that...you have totally convinced me.::

Please post more...I'd much rather read your posts than anything offered by the likes of Jaws, Neil or Stafford.

 

Absolutely. Mentioning one fight below heavy in a division that was still fairly new and not even being sure when the fight took place is hardly a convincing argument.

And you have hit it on the head. I don't know how some folks can try to dispute something when they don't have enough of a knowledge base.

But it's par for the course, I guess. It's not like not knowing much (or in some cases...anything) about fighters or fights of a particular era stops some folks around here from making statements about them.

 

Everybody should chill out and get on better

 

That would be a nice change. But unlikely as long as there are certain posters who delight in initiating pissing contests and ruining topics.

 

I am throwing this out here sincerely.....why is it that people regard the Heavyweight Division as being in the "Worst State since....." yet it is, ostensibly, the only division where the best guy would be regarded as capable of contending across the history of the sport??

Can the same be said, with the same confidence, of the best men at 200, 175, 168 etc??

Is it not ironic that Vitali is more trusted vs Foreman than Khan is vs JC Chavez or Pryor?

Who here fancies Bernard or Dawson vs Bob Foster or Archie Moore??

Who here likes Juan Manuel Marquez chances vs Duran??

 

Has he really? That's awesomely bad.

 

Because outside of Vitali (and to a lesser degree, Wlad), the division is terrible.

 

I think Donaire is a very credible opponent for any bantamweight. I honestly think that guy is the whole truth and nothing but the truth.:Thumbs:

 

And to be honest, the early part of Larry Holmes title reign was nothing special either as the division was in a transitional state where the top heavies of the 70's were either retired or way past it and hanging on for paydays and the up and comers didn't start to really emerge until 1981.

 

Lke Gandhi said Joe, be the change you want to see! :Thumbs:

 

Ahhhh...don't even start. ::

 

This topic was ruined as soon as it was started. If the idea was to debate whether the champions from 1981 are better than todays then why not just debate who won Holmes-Cobb?

 

And yet again...NOTHING of value from Neil.

You are today's heavyweight division of posters.

 

All bullshit aside, Joe. Did you start this topic so everyone would pat you on the back and agree with you that the crop of fighters was better then than now? did you expect folks to argue todays crop is better? its pretty much you stating the obvious.

 

folks have argued for today in this thread

 

who

 

Ugo
Sly
mikE

 

here's what i said "It was a better time for most American boxing fans because Americans were at the top of the sport. Your nostalgia is biased by knowing how many of these fighters would later turn out so it's really an unfair thing you are doing. You have the benefit of hindsight with 1981; you don't with 2011. Hell, we aren't even done with 2011.

I don't think the talent pool is worse today; I think the American talent pool is much worse today.

And if you are going to list 1981 guys, then you should go to the trouble of listing the 2011 comparables. I began making a more thorough response, but it was just too much work because of the vagueness of your OP."

Of course no one would take the time to do this. cdogg, steve dave, and broadwayjoe would rather circle jerk to Olivia Newton John singing 'physical'

The comparison isn't fair. How 2011 stacks up remains to be seen.

 

They're both worse.

Are some Americans disinterested because their country and fighters are no longer as dominant? There probably is an element of truth to that, but it's more so the mainstream fan.

This is a boxing forum. There aren't thousands of members and virtually none of them can be considered as part of the main stream.

There are great fighters today that could compete with (or outright beat) fighters from 1981. However the pool of talent is not as deep.

 

then let's see the pool of talent from 1981.
Might as well grab the November 1981 Ring Magazine and give us their top 10 rankings in each weight class. Then give us the records of the various fighters

I suspect there will be quite a bit of this going on in each weight class:

1. 1981 2. 2011 3. 2011 4. 1981 5. 2011

but let's see.