Soviets were always ahead in the amateur level. They beat US in the world championships and olympics most of the time in terms of medals. Look it up. They were not allowed to compete in pros until the 90's, that is why most the belts were held mainly by the Americans before. The only competition Americans had were mainly Brits.
Football/Basketball excuse is a farce. Seth Mitchell, a good athelete, got destroyed twice by guys who themselves got asswhipped by eastern Europeans. Also from 1995 and later, that most eastern European countries started to allow professional boxing, there have been 98 world champions from eastern Europe inside only 15 years (only major titles). More than any other geographical region inside these 15 years.
Obviously the fighters rule the heavyweight roost...simply because young, big American lads see American football as the aspirational sport to get rich and famous. Add in UFC and a decline in interest and it shows some of the reason why the division is such a joke now.
As for the idea that they have overtaken the Americans in achievement? Don't believe that for a second. For many decades before the late 90's American fighters dominated most divisions. Tougher fighters and less versions of titles. Will be a long time before the soviet area fighters will pass that
Former Soviet states always had boxing but from the early 20th century until 1990 they were only allowed to compete in amateur level. They had great amateur boxers but in general they were not as good as American boxers.
In 1990 the Soviet Union collapsed, their boxers were allowed to go profesionnal and the mass poverty that ensued with the end of the USSR was the perfect mixture to make former Soviet states a breeding ground for boxing.
This is how boxing works anywhere. In the 19th century American boxers were trash, the best came from the common wealth, but pro-boxing gained fame so now America produces great champions. Boxing was not always popular in Mexico, Puerto Rico & Cuba thus they did not always breed great champions. Now former Soviet states breed great fighters.
Only at HW and Cruiserweight.
Bradley, Mayweather (obviously), Danny Garcia, Devon Alexander, etc....all have MUCH better resumes than guys like GGGG or Provodnikov. It's not even close.
Pirog's resume isn't that good at all. He has one really notable win over Jacbos, but that dude's career is basically over after his back injury. I don't even know when the last time he fought was.
I didn't even mention SOG. His wins over Froch, Kessler, and Dawson make for a better resume (in terms of the level of fighters) than the Klitschko's resume combined.
The Klitschko's are dominant, but the opponents they face/beat are extremely unimpressive, especially in Vitali's case.
They haven't surpassed Americans in anything but the amateur game. The Klitschkos are the backbone of the heavyweight division plus they dominate the cruserweight division also. However, Provodnikov and Pirog are not elite fighters. Marco Huck has accomplished more than both of their careers combined. Golovkin has yet to have to have an elite opponent of his record also. And only Vitali has faced at least one hall of famer in his career. They are all hard to measure their ability because they haven't faced anyone close to their level.
Euros are funny, you've barely began to flourish with a FEW fighters. America and Mexico will always be the top boxing nations because they've been at it since the early 1900's. We've had fighters since the beginning. Besides Klitscho fights in the weakest heavyweight era of all time, GGG has fought no one, and provodnikov has proven himself.
In the past decade,with a couple of notable exceptions. for the most part the European fight game has dominated the U.S. in professional boxing.
Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Golovkin, Provodnikov, Pirog, and the Klitscho brothers etc
