Older fighters not as ripped as todays ones ?

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.

Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

I also think there IS more weight training than there used to be. Not clear at all how beneficial it is for ring performance though. Seems to me it just makes 5'7 lightweights into 5'7 welterweights. Yeah they are bigger and stronger. But the important question is are they RELATIVELY bigger and stronger against a welter than they would be at 135 with a lightweight?

marbleheadmaui wrote:

I also think there IS more weight training than there used to be. Not clear at all how beneficial it is for ring performance though. Seems to me it just makes 5'7 lightweights into 5'7 welterweights. Yeah they are bigger and stronger. But the important question is are they RELATIVELY bigger and stronger against a welter than they would be at 135 with a lightweight?

I think they are still in the same weight class because of how we weigh in now. Dont you?

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

NAHH here is the modern version. LOL

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

I also think there IS more weight training than there used to be. Not clear at all how beneficial it is for ring performance though. Seems to me it just makes 5'7 lightweights into 5'7 welterweights. Yeah they are bigger and stronger. But the important question is are they RELATIVELY bigger and stronger against a welter than they would be at 135 with a lightweight?

I think they are still in the same weight class because of how we weigh in now. Dont you?

Yeah, I just think that too is a bullspit comparison. I mean Ray Robinson today would have been a lightweight at 5'11 with a 72" inch reach!

I am persuaded that the optimal fighter's body is visually far more like a dancer's or a swimmer's than a bodybuilder's. Of course the Rock and Hurricane and Tiger would all just laugh at me.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

NAHH here is the modern version. LOL

He's GOTTA be four bills there doesn't he?

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

NAHH here is the modern version. LOL

He's GOTTA be four bills there doesn't he?

OH yeah easy. But he will still hit you once and knock your ass out. LOL

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

NAHH here is the modern version. LOL

He's GOTTA be four bills there doesn't he?

OH yeah easy. But he will still hit you once and knock your ass out. LOL

I'll give Mr. Esch three things. He could punch, he knew how to market himself and he loved to fight.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Maybe you can help me with something. I was going through our wonderful immortal section thanks to a bunch of us and was wondering something. Why is it when I look at old photo's of boxers they dont look cut up? I mean they dont look as muscular as today's fighters? Did they do less weight training or is it the old time photos dont show as much?

You're comparing photos of dried out fighters doing day before weigh-ins with those of guys who never dried out that way because weigh-ins were the same day is probably part of it.
Compare the IN RING physiques for the apples to apples comparison.

Now take some time and LOOK at Marciano here. He is one connecte piece of sinew.http://staging.thehistorybluff.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/marciano.jpg

Or look at Dick Tiger and Hurricane Carter here. http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0911/boxing.top.ten.greatest.middleweights.alltime/images/dick-tiger-rubin-carter.jpg

That makes sense. Man those two look cut!!! Tiger and Carter are pure muscle.

Yup. I do think, as I said below too that weightlifitng has become more common/important and that's probbaly part of it too.

Lastly I just went through the pics of the Immortals and it seems to me in THOSE cases the aims of the photographers changed. Over the years. The early photos are showing the fighters as fighters. The later ones are lit and set up to show the fighter as fitness/bodybuilder/specimen. Looks to me like that anyway.

Course then this guy blows a whole in my argument

http://www.sports-photos.com/catalog/images/TonyGalentoBW.tif.jpg

NAHH here is the modern version. LOL

He's GOTTA be four bills there doesn't he?

OH yeah easy. But he will still hit you once and knock your ass out. LOL

I'll give Mr. Esch three things. He could punch, he knew how to market himself and he loved to fight.

I loved the guy. But hey what was there not to like? USA boxing was bad ass I miss that channel.

today's fighters look & probably are more ripped because they spend more time on their physiques,but i'm guessing generally they are less fight fit than yesteryears fighters.less fights equals more gym time.more fights equals better conditioned

just look and marbs avatar and then tell me that they werent as ripped

Who changed the title of this thread? I was asking dmar and marble this.

powerpuncher wrote:

just look and marbs avatar and then tell me that they werent as ripped

I think marble hit it on the head. They were weight drained and also they didnt lift as much as they do now. A little too simplistic but it makes sense.

Their cocks were way bigger though.

hardcoreBEE24 wrote:

They're cocks were way bigger though.

LOL

One thing that always gets me about old-time fighters is that most of them probably never took a pain-killer in their lives. Even if they did, it was an Asprin or something. Today we get guys who can't even get in the ring with out an injection, let alone what they take AFTER the fight.

sooner there are many exceptions of ripped muscular fighters of the past..today there are more cause its the mindset of there training..look at the clip of beau jack and ike willams fight that marble put on..not only are they very muscular but with full rounded muscles for a lightweight..they had bodies of well developed 147 may 154 pounders..why..look at there legs..trim baby and not heavly muscled.greb was muscular exspecialy the arms and sholders..ripped noo.fit yes..emile griffith had a build that none approach today in the welters at all.plus flexing the abs or full tension was not the fashion of the photos back then..today it is..especialy at a weight in etc etc..marciano all around may of been the most fit fighter of all time argueably..not a half once of fat on that body..a perfect fighters build may be sugar ray robinson..ripped nope..trim solid yep..weight lifting unfortunetly was taboo at that time..marciano loved to lift for he was very strong..they told him to stop .he did..soo he started his own power routine.standing in the water or pool with the water chest high and he punched underwater non stop for several rounds..it helped in speed of delivery and in power of the punch plus endurance..he also used a 300 lb heavy punching bag..everyone else used the standard 75 lb one..look at basilio and his fights..his back is ripped with muscle due to hard training not lifting..are todays fighters overall more ripped then guys in the past..yes except for the exceptions marble and i said..there were more but what does it mean..in reality it means shit..just the fashion of the times..

dmar5143 wrote:

sooner there are many exceptions of ripped muscular fighters of the past..today there are more cause its the mindset of there training..look at the clip of beau jack and ike willams fight that marble put on..not only are they very muscular but with full rounded muscles for a lightweight..they had bodies of well developed 147 may 154 pounders..why..look at there legs..trim baby and not heavly muscled.greb was muscular exspecialy the arms and sholders..ripped noo.fit yes..emile griffith had a build that none approach today in the welters at all.plus flexing the abs or full tension was not the fashion of the photos back then..today it is..especialy at a weight in etc etc..marciano all around may of been the most fit fighter of all time argueably..not a half once of fat on that body..a perfect fighters build may be sugar ray robinson..ripped nope..trim solid yep..weight lifting unfortunetly was taboo at that time..marciano loved to lift for he was very strong..they told him to stop .he did..soo he started his own power routine.standing in the water or pool with the water chest high and he punched underwater non stop for several rounds..it helped in speed of delivery and in power of the punch plus endurance..he also used a 300 lb heavy punching bag..everyone else used the standard 75 lb one..look at basilio and his fights..his back is ripped with muscle due to hard training not lifting..are todays fighters overall more ripped then guys in the past..yes except for the exceptions marble and i said..there were more but what does it mean..in reality it means shit..just the fashion of the times..

Yeah I wasnt trying to say they were less fit I was just curious as to why.

hardcoreBEE24 wrote:

Their cocks were way bigger though.

I wouldn't know about that but they certainly had bigger balls back then.

Tobe06 wrote:

One thing that always gets me about old-time fighters is that most of them probably never took a pain-killer in their lives. Even if they did, it was an Asprin or something. Today we get guys who can't even get in the ring with out an injection, let alone what they take AFTER the fight.

You go back far enough and guys were drinking brandy between rounds. I'm not kidding!