I guess the difference here is that I don't see Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Holmes, etc...as "Old Timers" since I watched their careers while they happened. Unless that makes me an "Old Timer". ::
I am referring to you picking Benny Leonard over Shane Mosley in the other thread. That is something I simply can not understand from somebody who actually has watched videos of them
Yes. Head to head Oscar De La Hoya would have destroyed Benny Leonard very quickly. Leonard is one of the guys who deserves props for developing boxing and being far superior to his timers but he simply wouldnät be able to compete now
That wasn't at Lightweight, & De La Hoya never did enough to rank with Leonard. I do love Oscar, I admit, & I do get tired of his nay-sayers. The whole bit about him losing every significant fight, etc, is such rubbish. However, Leonard brought to the current arena, or Mosley (& De La Hoya, for that matter) would not beat him. IMO, anyway. What do you think of Henry Armstrong, or Jack Dempsey, in today's fight game?
Dunno, with horse shoes in his gloves like he reportedly had against Willard you'd have to give him a fair shot against Wladirina ::
Well there is our core disagreeance there --- one on old against new. Dempsey mops the floor with today's slobs, IMO.
Vitali and Wlad would cream Dempsey. Jack's simply too small for an Athletic skillful 21st century heavyweight. The Klits are no Willard.
Leaving aside the issue of boxing's advancement circa 1919, I find the chances of a 180lb come forward guy thriving at heavyweight today even in the current mess remote.