Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
Printable View
Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
;)Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleLouis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the 2nd greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
You are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZillaI do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
Joe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleLouis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.
How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali
Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogJoe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleLouis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.
How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali
I beg to differ. I think Ali would beat him. A thousand outcomes can be written but no-one will ever know for sure. Ali certainly fought the better opponents IMO and we can only speculate how good he would have been in his years away from the sport.
Put down the crack pipe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
It's easy to look technically skilled against overweight plodders who don't have the fitness, agility or ambition to take you out of your comfort zone.
I am of the mindset that current athletes in most instances compete at a higher level than athletes from 20-30 years ago. I think current athletes can take advantage of modern science (nutrition) and training techniques and in many cases start at a younger age. Also, there is way more money involved now so everyone trys to be a professional athlete for the most part (starting in grade school) and you are closer to having the very best people at the top of the game. When I watch videos of some of the fighters from the 70s, 60s, and even 80s etc their technique is terrible and it reminds me of a bar room brawl. You stick those guys in with a guy like Wlad who has great technique they will get killed.
I think Wlad would beat any of the past fighters most of the time if you plucked them from the past and stuck them in the ring with Wlad. Now if they had access to the same resources Wlad has had for the last 20 years than maybe they could compete but who knows it is a different game now......This is IMO.
And I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuYou are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZillaI do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
You honestly think Wlad hits harder than Foreman?? Well i'll respect your opinion and thats where i'll leave that topic!Quote:
Originally Posted by ZillaAnd I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuYou are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zilla
One thing though, if your trying to say Lamon Brewster is of the same quality as Joe Frazier then you are totally insane!
I totally disagree, technically fighters from the past have been far more gifted than todays crop. People like Ali, Louis, Holyfield, Tyson, SRR, SRL, Roberto Duran, Marvin Hagler (and the list goes on and on) were a lot more gifted than anyone today technically with the exception of Mayweather (maybe). Yes Wlad has good fundamentals, but he is also very robotic in what he does and in comparison to the likes of Ali, Tyson, Frazier etc is a slow HW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter
One thing I do agree with you on is that "most" top athletes now are at a higher level than in years gone by, but not for me in boxing. Now the reason boxing hasn't moved with the times as other sports has is because the people who used to come to boxing are going to other sports where the rewards are higher and the risks are way lower. I mean look at boxing in the 80's for example. Ray Leonards fights used to make more money than the big fights now and when you take inflation into account that is an amazing feat. Same goes for Tyson and hell Ali for that matter. When Ali fought Foreman he made £5million. Now almost 40 years later David Haye did almost 1million PPV sales for Sky in his last bout and made the same 5 million. So how, may I ask is there more money in the sport now?? I'll agree there is more money in other sports, but boxing doesn't hold the same interest it once did and hasn't moved with the times.
Actually Muhammad Ali had 6 gift decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogJoe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleLouis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sumkalambay
I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.
How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali
Ken Norton x3
Doug Jones
Earnie Shavers
Jimmy Young
I think he lost 4 of the decisions i listed there, with one draw to Doug Jones.
I also heard his fight with Alfredo Evangelista was close aswell, although i've only seen bits and pieces of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZillaAnd I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuYou are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zilla
George Foreman hits much harder than Wladimir Klitschko. And since when has Lamon Brewster been a high quality little man ?
I like Lamon Brewster and defended him in the last thread, but he was not elite. He got beat convincingly in his prime to Clifford Eitenne, Charles Shufford.
Yes he held a title and made a few defences, but even so i don't think anyone would ever label Lamon Brewster an elite fighter. Infact he's an overachiever that he actually managed to win a belt, and defend it a few times.
And that the fact he beat Wladimir Klitschko, speaks volumes IMO. And when the rematch happened Lamon Brewster was a shell of his former self.
In defense of the loss to Etienne, Lamon did screw his knee up in that fight
Ali most definitely did not get 3 gifts against Norton, seeing as Norton WON the first fight. Need to work on your maths Ice. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
I do think Norton won 2 out of 3 (although I also thought he edged Larry Holmes), but I think Ali beat Jones, Shavers & Young. He's not a complete shoe-in for greatest HW of all time, although he does just edge Louis for me.
No way does Wlad hit harder than Foreman. He hits hard, a lot harder than many give him credit for, but not harder than Foreman. Lamon Brewster was not a high quality 'little' man for me, but even if he was Joe Frazier was an ATG 'little' man. The last sentence is just stupid if you've ever seen Frazier's fights, particularly the Thrilla In Manilla, where he fought blind. Frazier defined heart, if Brewster could do it, Smokin' Joe would have done it as a doddle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zilla
No, he's not Lyle. He's very good, certainly much, much better than some of the haters on here give him credit for, but aside from Mayweather, there's Bernard Hopkins, Juan Manuel Marquez, Chad Dawson, Ivan Calderon, Hozumi Hasegawa & Tim Bradley, all of whom you could make strong arguments for being more technically skilled & there's at least a couple who are dead certs on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle