Disparity in talent in ALL divisions?

I wasn't comparing an entire decade to a single year, these were all champions in 1981 vs 2013.

 

Funny that you write that, because when i wrote this i thought some would make a case for some of todays fighters, but i never thought anyone would try for GG over Hagler which i believe would be a bloody mess with MH in a UD. I know the Vito and Duran fights will pop up (and it's a legit argument) but i'd love to hear how you see this playing out.

 

Vito was a damned good middleweight who nobody had an easy time with at his best... He's been relegated to some sort of Gatti status it seems, but the fact of the matter is that he was twice the fighter Gatti was

 

The problem here is, we don't know how good GGG actually is. Sure, chances are that he is never good enough to beat Hagler (that goes to nearly everybody who has ever fought at middleweight) but for what we have seen so far there is no proof that he could not be a legendary fighter, either. In '81 we didn't know how good Hagler would be either: he was a very good fighter of course but achieved the status of a legend later

 

Bullshit! Prime Gomez would had starched Rigo within five rounds.

 

Another example of a fight which is very difficult to predict, since we don't know enough about Rigo

 

Wilfredo would have his hands full with Rigo

Believe it

 

Rigondeaux Punches VERY Hard for a Little Man & Gomez DID NOT Have the Greatest Whiskers in the World...No, You Didn't Imagined This, it's a FACT...



REED:mj:

 

I think we know plenty about Rigo, BTW

He just won a one-sided paintjob over one of the best fighters in the sport

 

Rigo is very good at boxing, I think in my mind. That said, I'd favour Gomez at 122.

 

I'm not sure I would actually. He looked like a fucking wizard against Donaire, made him look like a clueless scrub.

 

Big ears is no Gomez. Gomez was not only a bigger puncher than Donaire, he had better skills as well. Donaire's skills are overrated. He's more pure talent than skill. Like Roy, only without a quarter of Roy's talent.

 

Rigo is a truly elite fighter in any era

 

True, but I am not sure of we know enough to accurately pick Gomez vs Rigo. It says something about how good he seems to be though

 

Donaire's basically an elite counter puncher who can't really lead. The Rigo fight went the only way it was ever gonna go based on styles and it didn't effect my opinion of Donaire one bit. He's a one trick pony but he's as good at that trick as it gets. Donaire-Gomez would be one hell of a fight actually

 

prime Foreman vs. Boner

 

Donaire-Gomez would be a great fight

 

What's funny is all the the folks who try to tear down the 80s KNOW it was a better time with better fighters, but feel the need to say stuff like "yeah, it was way better, but not THAT much way better." alm:

 

I see it differently. I think the only point worth of discussing here is exactly how much better the 80s were and in which ways, since everybody agrees that it was a more solid time period.

Also, if we want this discussion to lead somewhere, it is a point worth debating. For example if we see that early 80s was much better than late 80s, then we could assume that it is a case of "natural variation", yet if all of the 80s was way better than all 2010s, then we could find reasons from deeper (and perhaps discuss those). Also there is a difference between how much better the best of the 80s were compared to the best of now, and how much better the general level of 80s was.

So, I don't see it as simply being twisting words, but trying to continue the discussion

 

You're picking the best guys of the present vs the worst names of the 80s. The OP picks the best of the 80s vs the best of today. The difference is obvious, I don't understand the point of your post at all.

Pick the best of the era in the OP vs the best of today and you have the OP. That era was better, objectively. The best fights on the entire list are Rigo vs Gomez & Floyd vs Benitez.

 

By '81 Hagler was a very proven champion who you could have watched up to that point in his career and easily know that he would beat the fuck out of the present day GGG & it wouldn't be close

 

Hagler was considered the uncrowned champ a good 2 or 3 years before he actually won the thing

He was a 4-1 favorite over Antuofermo (who was the only undisputed champ in the game at the time)

 

Up until the point Donaire gets KTFO.

 

or Gomez

 

I'm not mikE. I was replying to the "in terms of finding a champ from the 80's against today"

 

yeah huh

you're mikE

whiskeY

 

The only thing you have accomplished here is giving me a headache. ::

And I really haven't seen too many compelling arguments for the more recent fighters. Just throwing around the word "nostalgia" (not you...I know) doesn't strengthen anyone's argument.

 

Hagler was considered the best middleweight in the world before he even won the title and he had proven himself for years against quality opposition. Hagler's success as Middleweight champ was no surprise to anyone who knew about him at the time he was fighting.