What is the best decade for boxing? (The Finals)

[Takes Two To Tango]

What is the 4 best decades for boxing?

I used this for reference.

The Top Ranked Boxers by Decade

Boxer Ranking Explanations


1970s

Muhammad Ali
Carlos Monzon
Joe Frazier
Carlos Zarate
Danny Lopez
Roberto Duran
Jose Napoles
Bob Foster
Masao Oba
Victor Galindez
George Foreman
Miguel Canto
Rodolfo Martinez
Rodrigo Valdez
Venice Borkhorsor
Ken Norton
John Conteh
Alexis Arguello
Erbito Salavarria
Ernesto Marcel
Alfonso Zamora
Rafael Herrera
Ruben Olivares
Betulio Gonzalez
Antonio Cervantes
Bruno Arcari
Samuel Serrano
Kuniaki Shibata
Marvin Johnson
Esteban De Jesus


1980s

Marvin Hagler
Sugar Ray Leonard
Mike Tyson
Dwight Muhammad Qawi
Tommy Hearns
Evander Holyfield
Michael Spinks
Larry Holmes
Azumah Nelson
Salvador Sanchez
Julio Cesar Chavez
Aaron Pryor
Wilfredo Gomez
Jeff Chandler
Donald Curry
Lloyd Honeyghan
Bernardo Pinango
Santos Laciar
Mike McCallum
Roberto Duran
Gilberto Roman
Jeff Fenech
Alexis Arguello
Eddie Mustafa Muhammad
Henry Camacho
Jung-Koo Chang
Virgil Hill
Carlos De Leon
Sot Chitalada
Jiro Watanabe


1990s

Pernell Whitaker
Roy Jones Jr.
Julio Cesar Chavez
Oscar De La Hoya
Evander Holyfield
Felix Trinidad
Ricardo Lopez
Terry Norris
Orlando Canizales
Riddick Bowe
Mark Johnson
James Toney
Junior Jones
Buddy McGirt
Yuri Arbachakov
Kostya Tszyu
Meldrick Taylor
Naseem Hamed
Michael Nunn
Sung-Kil Moon
Steve Collins
Dariusz Michalczewski
Johnny Tapia
Michael McCallum
Erick Morales
Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Frankie Randall
Azumah Nelson
Lennox Lewis
Nigel Benn


If you don't want to be tagged, just let me know thanks.

Please vote.

Spoiler

@bubbleboyjones @Stormtrooper85 @JC615 @Hagler @Noctilux @Spam On Rye @Monte Moku @tank666 @HHJ @Ruv @GordoBarraBJJ @TeenageMutantLesnarTurtle @F15
@Number 8

 

[mozfonky]

hard choices, off of my gut, i'd say the 80's. The seventies had a post prime ali, duran/monzon while the 80's had prime holmes, prime leonard, hearns, hagler and Pernell and Holyfield were well underway by the end of the decade. The 90's, Ya, we had Roy but he didn't have the same level of comp and even if he was in the 80's he might have been too big for the big four by the time a fight coulda been made. He was a huge middleweight, bursting at the seems in every fight, how long could he reasonably remain a middleweight? Whitaker and Chavez both were pretty significant in the 80's and 90's but you'd have to think they were better at their lower weights. the 90's did have oscar and a decent crop of heavyweights. tough choices but I'd go with the 80's.

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

hard choices, off of my gut, i'd say the 80's. The seventies had a post prime ali, duran/monzon while the 80's had prime holmes, prime leonard, hearns, hagler and Pernell and Holyfield were well underway by the end of the decade. The 90's, Ya, we had Roy but he didn't have the same level of comp and even if he was in the 80's he might have been too big for the big four by the time a fight coulda been made. He was a huge middleweight, bursting at the seems in every fight, how long could he reasonably remain a middleweight? Whitaker and Chavez both were pretty significant in the 80's and 90's but you'd have to think they were better at their lower weights. the 90's did have oscar and a decent crop of heavyweights. tough choices but I'd go with the 80's.

Thanks for sharing your insight, please vote if you like.

 

[StopDucking]

1980s by far: Leonard vs Hearns, Hagler vs Hearns, McCallum vs Jackson, prime Mike Tyson…

 

[Hagler]

Don't forget Matthew Saad Muhammad, no matter if you put him in the 70s or the 80s.

 

[Spam On Rye]

80s. But I was born in early 80s so that time seems mythical to me.

 

[treelo]

i loved 80's boxing, absolutely loved it, its what me fall in love with the sport, but i've had to go for the 90's, just so many legends careers that due to my age i actually followed all the way through

 

[djacobox372]

I'm an 80's kid, but the 90s takes it for me. HW division was just so damn shallow in the 80s. RJJ is also one my favs and he owned the 90s.

 

[GordoBarraBJJ]

For me it was the 90s because that is when I got back in to combat sports.

But truthfully, the 80s is it IMO.

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

Looks like the 80s is the best decade.

 

[RichardHarrow]

I don’t know enough about the 70s to comment but 80s definitely bests the 90s.

 

[mozfonky]

I'm an 80's kid, but the 90s takes it for me. HW division was just so damn shallow in the 80s. RJJ is also one my favs and he owned the 90s.

HW's of the 80's get bad rap. They're major problem was one of discipline and drugs, overweight and addicted. I think Michael Dokes said that King liked them drugged out because they were easier to control, and he had them train at his gym where he could nickel and dime a bit more for "training expenses". "Training expenses" always made me laugh, boxing is the cheapest sport in the world, you really don't even need a traditional gym, just a bag, some wraps, gloves, shoes, sure you gotta have ring etc.., to spar in but Michael Carbajal famously proved you could be a world champ with shit you can buy from home depot. Either way, none of it should cost into the hundreds of thousands, even for a top fighter who has to pay sparring partners. I guess maybe the trainers need a cut but I don't think that's what they mean when they say, "training expenses" just an excuse to spend money and they all do it when they're on top.

Anyway, as far as talent and expertise, the 80's gets a very bad rap, they were good fighters with serious issues and capable on a good night of toppling anyone in the division. Buster Douglas was an 80's heavyweight, typical underachiever.

 

[Monte Moku]

Man the 80s and 90s were such an incredible time to be a fight fan. Some of the best Boxers who've ever lived, contains the silver age and golden age of Muay Thai, the golden age of Kickboxing, power era Taekwondo, the peak of Kyokushin's popularity, the birth of MMA, etc. Even stuff like pro wrestling was at its peak what with its own golden era, new generation, and the attitude era. Really a special time for combat sports and things adjacent to it.

 

[totoro mick b]

Maybe this is "off topic", but ...
When I look at today's era, what strikes me the most is the lack of American boxers. To me, it seems like the competition back then was kinda skewed. "World" champion was kinda relative, considering how the USA benefited from a restricted talent pool. A lot of exceptional Eastern European fighters were simply absent. There were no specimens like the Klitschko Bros, Usyk, Beterbiev, Bivol...etc.

During the Cold War era, fighters from the Soviet bloc were straight-up barred from professional boxing. So Ali's best opponents back then were the likes of Foreman (US), Ken Norton (US), Jerry Quarry (US), Joe Frazier (US), Henry Cooper (UK), Liston (US), Patterson (US)...(to name a few).

The ban on professional boxing in communist countries stayed in place until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Even during the '90s, the best "Euro" they had back then was Andrew Golota (which honestly isn't saying much). After the Soviet Union fell, it took several years for Eastern European boxers to become more relevant. It's really only in the early 2000s that fighters from former Soviet countries began making serious noise in pro boxing.

Take Lennox Lewis' amateur record, for example. You'll see he lost to Alexander Miroshnichenko. Same story for Riddick Bowe's amateur record — 2 straight losses to the very same Miroshnichenko. Lennox also had amateur losses to guys like Ladislav Husarik, Valery Abadzhyan, Petar Stoimenov, and Vyacheslav Yakovlev — (all ex soviet-bloc boxers)

Miroshnichenko's pro career? Nothing crazy — he had a 21-1 record, with his one loss coming against Maskaev before retiring in '93. But it really makes you wonder — what if? I'm convinced the pro boxing scene would've looked completely different in a different historical context.

Now, the counter-argument from people trying to dismiss this perspective is that American boxers aren't dominating anymore because there's no more "money" in boxing. So instead, they all went to the NBA, NFL, or MMA.

 

[totoro mick b]

But just look at the NBA now. There's a guy breaking all the records and pulling stats that only Wilt Chamberlain used to. (Jokic.) Matter of fact, look at the past MVP winners: Jokic x3, Embiid, Giannis x2. You'd have to go all the way back to 2017 to find an American player.

Tennis offers a similar story. Back in the '80s and '90s, you had American players dominating — guys like Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, McEnroe, Connors, and others. But then, the rise of international stars like Rafael Nadal (Spain), Roger Federer (Switzerland), and Novak Djokovic (Serbia) changed the game forever. Things just weren’t the same after that.

Today, tennis is one of the most international sports out there. But that happened for different reasons — bigger prize money, sponsorships, and the globalization of the sport, etc.

And the "money" argument for boxing? Doesn't hold water. Check out the highest prize money ever in boxing (not limited to heavyweights):

Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao (2015) - Estimated $250 million purse split between the two fighters
Tyson Fury vs. Oleksandr Usyk (2024) - Fury earned $103 million for this bout
Anthony Joshua vs. Oleksandr Usyk (2022) - Joshua earned $75 million
Canelo Alvarez vs. Jaime Munguia (2024) - Alvarez earned over $35 million
Anthony Joshua vs. Daniel Dubois (2024) - Joshua's earnings potentially exceeded £25 million ($31.5 million) including PPV revenue
For the record, Mike Tyson's highest reported fight purse was $30 million for his 2002 bout against Lennox Lewis. (Adjusting for inflation, that's about $48 million in 2024 dollars.)

Ali's biggest fight purse came from his match against Larry Holmes in 1980, where he earned $8 million. Adjusted for inflation, that's about $22 million in today's currency.

 

[Dr Fong]

But just look at the NBA now. There's a guy breaking all the records and pulling stats that only Wilt Chamberlain used to. (Jokic.) Matter of fact, look at the past MVP winners: Jokic x3, Embiid, Giannis x2. You'd have to go all the way back to 2017 to find an American player.

Tennis offers a similar story. Back in the '80s and '90s, you had American players dominating — guys like Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, McEnroe, Connors, and others. But then, the rise of international stars like Rafael Nadal (Spain), Roger Federer (Switzerland), and Novak Djokovic (Serbia) changed the game forever. Things just weren’t the same after that.

Today, tennis is one of the most international sports out there. But that happened for different reasons — bigger prize money, sponsorships, and the globalization of the sport, etc.

And the "money" argument for boxing? Doesn't hold water. Check out the highest prize money ever in boxing (not limited to heavyweights):

Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao (2015) - Estimated $250 million purse split between the two fighters
Tyson Fury vs. Oleksandr Usyk (2024) - Fury earned $103 million for this bout
Anthony Joshua vs. Oleksandr Usyk (2022) - Joshua earned $75 million
Canelo Alvarez vs. Jaime Munguia (2024) - Alvarez earned over $35 million
Anthony Joshua vs. Daniel Dubois (2024) - Joshua's earnings potentially exceeded £25 million ($31.5 million) including PPV revenue
For the record, Mike Tyson's highest reported fight purse was $30 million for his 2002 bout against Lennox Lewis. (Adjusting for inflation, that's about $48 million in 2024 dollars.)

Ali's biggest fight purse came from his match against Larry Holmes in 1980, where he earned $8 million. Adjusted for inflation, that's about $22 million in today's currency.

Tennis is not the best example. The US is historically the most successful country of course, but it has never really 'dominated' the sport. It has always been pretty international, even if it has expanded.

Australia has won almost as many Davis Cups as the US (despite dropping off itself). The French have still won by far the most (male) French Opens. The British have still won the most (male) Wimbledons. Australia has won by far the most Australian opens. So, each grand slam was historically the domain of its host country.

And in the period you mentioned when Americans were supposedly dominating, Sweden alone had Borg, Wilander and Edberg. So that international character has always been there, even if the hotspots of success have shifted.

 

[totoro mick b]

Tennis is not the best example. The US is historically the most successful country of course, but it has never really 'dominated' the sport. It has always been pretty international, even if it has expanded.

Australia has won almost as many Davis Cups as the US (despite dropping off itself). The French have still won by far the most (male) French Opens. The British have still won the most (male) Wimbledons. Australia has won by far the most Australian opens. So, each grand slam was historically the domain of its host country.

And in the period you mentioned when Americans were supposedly dominating, Sweden alone had Borg, Wilander and Edberg. So that international character has always been there, even if the hotspots of success have shifted.

Take the dominance of French players during the 1920s–1930s. It was largely due to restricted international participation. Ask yourself why the last time a French player won the French Open singles title was back in '83. It wasn’t until the 1960s that the French Open became a truly 'global' event. And as soon as that happened, you either had Spaniards, Swedes, Aussies winning everything. (It actually started sooner, back in the '40s). Either way, French players were basically just playing against each other.

Same thing with Wimbledon.

You essentially had Brits playing against each other for over 50+ years and occasionally Aussies and Kiwis. (No wonder—they share historical and constitutional ties with the United Kingdom as part of the Commonwealth of Nations, i.e., an organization of countries that were mostly former territories of the British Empire.) Then it's only after WW1 that "international" players started to show up (French, Americans), and it was game over for the Brits when the Open Era started in '68. The only exception was Andy Murray, who won it twice in 2013 and 2016. Twice since 1968. Only twice in the span of the last 56 years.

 

[listrahtes]

But just look at the NBA now. There's a guy breaking all the records and pulling stats that only Wilt Chamberlain used to. (Jokic.) Matter of fact, look at the past MVP winners: Jokic x3, Embiid, Giannis x2. You'd have to go all the way back to 2017 to find an American player.

Thats as dumb as an analogy you could have made. The NBA of today is an absolute walk in the park and much less physical and demanding as back with Chamberlain or Bird. no handchecking, travelling isnt called anymore. Bron can basically run with the ball to the other side, star players get every offensive or defensive foul for them. Constant flopping. If Bron or Ante run into an opponent in general they get the foul call. A lot started before Bron but LeBron was basically the reason for them creating special superstar protection and minimizing defense as he is such a clumsy player.

The NBA has changed the rules to create as much points as possible. Back then Euro league was called the soft league and it was to the ultra tough and athletic NBA. Now Euro League is tougher than NBA . Thats why you have so many more points. Often there isnt even any more defense against it but its just run n gun.

Watch 90s NBA and then the crap they serve nowadays. THats why NBA is loosing fans every year.

 

[treelo]

gone totally off topic, but let me join in, i am not basketball fan at all, but i have noticed that people are just allowed to run with the ball now without bouncing it...ie. travelling

have the rules changed or are they just not arsed anymore and want a more friendly sport for people to watch?

 

[totoro mick b]

Thats as dumb as an analogy you could have made. The NBA of today is an absolute walk in the park and much less physical and demanding as back with Chamberlain or Bird. no handchecking, travelling isnt called anymore. Bron can basically run with the ball to the other side, star players get every offensive or defensive foul for them. Constant flopping. If Bron or Ante run into an opponent in general they get the foul call. A lot started before Bron but LeBron was basically the reason for them creating special superstar protection and minimizing defense as he is such a clumsy player.

The NBA has changed the rules to create as much points as possible. Back then Euro league was called the soft league and it was to the ultra tough and athletic NBA. Now Euro League is tougher than NBA . Thats why you have so many more points. Often there isnt even any more defense against it but its just run n gun.

Watch 90s NBA and then the crap they serve nowadays. THats why NBA is loosing fans every year.

But if that were true, everybody would be able to pull off 'Jokic'-type stats, wouldn't they? 'An absolute walk in the park' makes you sound as deluded as the YouTubers who are basically lying to themselves, thinking they can beat sub-average NBA players. They can't!


Only about 1.2% of college men's basketball players end up getting drafted by an NBA team. For high school players, the odds are even more daunting, with just 3 in 10,000 (0.03%) making it to the NBA.

To put this in perspective, about 500,000 high school boys play basketball at any given time, and only 16,000 of them will go on to play in college. And just 110 will make at least one NBA appearance in their career.

What Are The Odds Of Making It In The NBA?

Discover the odds of making it in the NBA and all the other factors that have to be taken into account.

www.casino.org

Nobody in today's NBA is pulling off these types of stats. NOBODY.


LeBron gets a free pass for a lot of things, but hey, he's NBA royalty at this point.

What's killing the NBA is this: