|
||||
|
12-21-2012, 03:31 PM | #1 |
Hall Of Famer
|
Interesting Comparison
About 40 years ago the folks at The Ring Magazine listed the top heavyweight contenders to champion Joe Frazier's title:
Joe Frazier, Champion 1.Muhammad Ali(39-1-0) 2.George Foreman (36-0-0) 3.Jimmy Ellis (36-7-0) 4.Ron Lyle (18-0-0) 5.Floyd Patterson (55-8-1) 6.Ernie Terrell(44-7-0) 7.Jose Roman (41-7-1) 8.Joe Bugner (41-4-1) 9.Ken Norton (28-1-0) 10.Jose Luis Garcia (24-2-1) Compare that to the present group on Boxrec.com Wladimir Klitschko - champion 1.Vitali Klitschko (45-2-0) 2.Tomasz Adamek (47-2-0) 3.Kubrat Pulev (17-0) 4.David Haye (26-2-0) 5.Alexander Povetkin (25-0) 6.Tyson Fury (20-0-0) 7.Odlanier Solis (18-1-0) 8.Robert Helenius (18-0-0) 9.Johnathan Banks (29-1-0) 10.Tony Thompson (36-3-0) First thing you might notice is that Group 1 is way more experienced. It's probably much lighter in total weight as well. How would Group 2 fare against Group 1, if you could pluck Group 1 from the end of 1972 and bring them into 2012? Cap
__________________
"...There were Giants in Those Days.." |
12-21-2012, 04:14 PM | #2 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,095
|
Clear comparison of how much more talent went into the profession of boxing (especially from U.S.) back then as compared today.
Out side of Klitschko brothers, I wouldn't see one of today's top 10 beating any of the 72's top 10 (regardless of ranking). |
12-23-2012, 01:25 PM | #3 |
Hall Of Famer
|
Another observation. Only two of Group 1 were not US citizens, only 1 of Group 2 is.
Floyd Patterson (#5) retired just a few months later. Ernie Terrell, the tallest guy in Group 1, was never considered a big star in the division and he had just three more fights, losing two of them, before retiring the following year. Joe "King" Roman was a B class heavyweight who got his shot at the heavyweight title off wins over Jose Urtain, Charley Polite, Tony Ventura and Terry Daniels. Joe Bugner made his name that year beating the best in Europe when that didn't mean a whole lot. Ken Norton was an up and comer with a string of wins over mostly mediocre opponents and a knockout loss to No. 10 Jose Luis Garcia two years before. Cap
__________________
"...There were Giants in Those Days.." |
01-04-2013, 01:11 AM | #4 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 5,732
|
Quote:
1972 Joe Frazier (11-0-0) Muhammad Ali(11-0-0) Jimmy Ellis (11-0-0) Floyd Patterson (10-1-0) George Foreman (9-2-0) Ernie Terrell(8-3-0) Ken Norton (7-4-0) Joe Bugner (6-5-0) Ron Lyle (6-5-0) Jose Roman (5-6-0) Jose Luis Garcia (2-8-1) only two fighters finished the series below .500 2012 Vitali Klitschko (7-4-0) Wladimir Klitschko (6-5-0) Odlanier Solis (5-6-0) Robert Helenius (4-7-0) Tony Thompson (3-8-0) Alexander Povetkin (3-8-0) Tomasz Adamek (2-9-0) David Haye (1-9-1) Tyson Fury (1-10-0) Kubrat Pulev (1-10-0) Johnathan Banks (1-10-0) only the Klitschko brothers were able to post a record above .500 |
|
01-04-2013, 01:06 PM | #5 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,042
|
Interesting Results ...
Agree with the general consensus about the relative weakness of the top HWs of today versus yesteryear, although a couple of those near the bottom in 1972 could be considered easier opponents.
Still, hard to see Norton losing 4 of 11 against today's crop. Who did Kenny lose to? The two Klitschkos and who else? |
01-04-2013, 08:46 PM | #6 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 5,732
|
Quote:
lost to Vitali (KO), Odlanier Solis (SD15), Robert Helenius (TKO8) & Tony Thompson (KO7). |
|
01-06-2013, 04:11 AM | #7 |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29
|
Neither do I. Plus, I think the Klitschko brothers are vastly over-rated. Good fighters. However, this era of HW boxing is probably the weakest ever. Klitschko brothers would be very lucky to crack the top 10 during the mid 60's - mid 70's. Boxing is truly more hype than substance. We need to go back to the good ole days when fighters fought at least 1x every month or two and go back to 15rd title fights. Except for a small majority, most fighters of today really don't know their craft compared to the boxer's of old, nor do that they have that physical and mental toughness of the old time fighters...nor the gameness or grit. I guess 20,000,000- 40,000,000 a fight doesn't give you that extra push to continue when all seems lost because 1 payday like that win or lose and you're set for life. Fighters back then made good money but they had to fight a lot more frequently to keep the food on the table. People get mesmerized by the flashiness of today's weak fighters.
|
01-06-2013, 04:13 AM | #8 | |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29
|
Quote:
|
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|