I cannot thınk of a sıngle fıghter. He was just too crafty and too explosıve. Yes Schmelıng got hım but that was really early on ın hıs career I thınk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sv1ph-Ecf0
Printable View
I cannot thınk of a sıngle fıghter. He was just too crafty and too explosıve. Yes Schmelıng got hım but that was really early on ın hıs career I thınk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sv1ph-Ecf0
Vitali / Lennox / Tyson / Holyfield / Holmes i think they would all beat him.
The most interesting matchup I can think for Joe Louis is Gene Tunney. Gene was a great boxer and given the hell Billy Conn gave to Louis it's an interesting matchup to think about.
I'll agree wıth the 1986 Tyson who maybe nobody could stop that year. As for Holyfıeld I dont see ıt. Vıtalı no way. I now that Holmes may well beat Louıs I forgot all about Larry when I wrote that post. Yes Holmes would have a 70% chance I thınk now. I dont want to comment on Lewıs because my opınıon of hım ıs not popular.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
Yes Tunney was the wıley fox wasnt he. He may pose the same surprısıng performance as Conn dıd. Good poınt and good choıce there.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
For me the fight I would most like to see would be what is probably the most fantasized fight in the history of the sport...
Ali Vs Louis. Ali wins on points for me!
I will say this for certain....Joe Louis demolishes Mike Tyson....yes that would happen.
Evander Holyfield, he'd give ANYBODY a hard fight...granted it may or may not be due to HGH but he was one tough bastard
I completely agree with this post. Evander was a true hard bastard and he had great boxing skill to go with it. I'd just favour Louis but it would have been one hell of a fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Louis would have murdered Tyson, I'm shocked that is even in doubt!
I do think Joe was better historical HW , but at 13 stone , dropped by guys like Tony Galento , stopped by Max , i think Tyson would KO early , and i dont rate tyson at all.
Never doubt the Tyson fans...they are rabid and you know they say "in Mike Tyson's prime he was invincible" :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuI completely agree with this post. Evander was a true hard bastard and he had great boxing skill to go with it. I'd just favour Louis but it would have been one hell of a fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Louis would have murdered Tyson, I'm shocked that is even in doubt!
Joe Louis was simply to small to deal with the top heavyweights of the last 40 years. Nobody who barely reached 200 pounds could beat the Klitschko brothers. Ali to big, Foreman, Lewis. Mike Sphinx would have been good fight. Evander was a monster for his size. Louis was great for his time but leave it there. James Toney 2nd fight vs. Sam Peters is a prime example of what size does to crafty fighters.
agreed , I don't think eras should ever be compared but at same time like doing it as does the world !
I honestly think our very own big Frank Bruno would have taken Louis - and that just shows you how the modern athlete must have changed over the 40 year gap !!
Your not wrong mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
I've gone off comparing fighters from eras that are light years apart.
I could compare him with Ali Fraizer Foreman and Norton at a push but that's about it.
Joe was a magnificent puncher though. His punch placement was second to none...
OH for fucksake joe was put down close to 15 times in his career by numerous sub 200lb fighters!
190 lb Schmeling and 184 lb Marciano Destroyed him!. He got knocked down and badly hurt by bums, tomato cans, midgets, middleweights, super middleweights, light heavyweights, etc. He was knocked down, badly hurt and almost KO'd by fat midget tony Galento. He got schooled by 174 lb Conn, if it was a 12 round fight, Louis would've lost a wide UD to a 174 lb.
Louis got knocked down 3 times by former Super Middleweight Walcott! SMW Ezzard Charles destroyed Lewis with superior boxing..........Walker, Sharkey are both blown up middleweights and would get KTFO by Wlad. Louis, jack johnson etc etc are intellectually inferior boxers because 50 years is a long time and boxing has evolved as well as the human body and training and nutrition.
And before u all start citing Corrie Sanders, 230lb 6'4" sanders is the biggest punching left handed HW fighter in history! Wlad lost to Brewster because of Fatigue and not a weak chin AND WAS VERY INEXPERIENCED vs purity. Louis has may beat a young wlad, with defense and training issues but i doubt it.
This nostalgia crap has no real basis, the Ali that was fighting 177 and 180 pounders or the Louis that was struggling with 170 pounders will be dog meat against a 247 pound, athletic, 6'6" ring tactician like Wlad. We are not talking about Primo Carnera (who actually became champ even with his limited skills) or Valuev here, Wlad is a whole different fighter.
Let me point out that NOBODY here claims that very tall+heavy boxers are unbeatable.
·Nikolay Valuev ·Wladimir Klitschko all have losses on their records against smaller opponents. Nobody claims that big boxers will always win.
However, let's check concrete examples of these "ancient behemoths".
The following giants (usually mentioned in this order) are used to prove that tall boxers are "beatable although being giants":
·Primo Carnera, 6'5.5", median fighting weight 266 lbs (Joe Louis' biggest weight difference, and the prime example for beatable giants)
·Abe Simon, 6'4", median 253 lbs
·Buddy Baer, 6'6.5", median 240 lbs
·Jess Willard, 6'6.5", median 225 lbs
Sometimes also the following beatable giants are mentioned:
·Tony Drake, 257 lbs (Dempsey's biggest weight difference)
·Humphrey Jackson, 254 lbs (Marciano's biggest weight difference)
Now after we exclude those boxers who are not real giants (e.g. 6'4") or who are bums (like Humphrey Jackson with a record of 4-3 and Tony Drake with a record of 0-1) only the following remain:
Primo Carnera
Abe Simon
Buddy Baer
These 3 were all beaten by Joe Louis, which shows what an exceptional fighter Joe Louis was.
Analyzing these three giants further it turns out, that
Buddy Baer has won only against 3 non-bummy opponents 200×2 (Abe Simon, Tony Galento, Eddie Hogan)
Abe Simon is a featherfist and has 10 losses on his record (36-10), and has won only against 2 non-bummy opponents 200×2 (Toles, Thompson)
Primo Carnera has 14 losses on his record, is smaller than Vitali Klitschko and was obviously suffering from acromegalic pituitary gigantism (= is not naturally tall like Vitali Klitschko, but a freak of nature like Nikolay Valuev)
I don't want to take ANYTHING away from Joe Louis' wins, but my statement is:
These giants were far from comparable to modern ultraheavyweight champs (let alone that Baer and Simon never were champs).
It's unimaginable what modern champs would do to Joe Louis, if already Buddy Baer managed to catapult Joe Louis out of the ring in round #1.
Joe Louis vs Sonny Liston would have also been a hell of a macthup prime v prime...I still favor Louis as he was the better boxer.
Tunney v louis = dream fight.
This post is full of holes. For a start to say he lost to Marciano and Schmeling is just juvenile. He was a young lad against Max and more than made up for it in the rematch and well I don't think I even need to mention the Marciano fight do I?Quote:
Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER
You say he was schooled by Conn and had it been a 12 rounder Conn would have won. Can you say that for certain? 1 judge had it level after 12 but at the end of the day it was a 15 rounder. I'm pretty sure the urgency would have kicked in earlier had it been a shorter fight. He took him out much quicker in the rematch but I see you happened to leave that out.
No one is allowed to mention Corrie Sanders because you have measured his punch and he is the hardest punching southpaw ever. Funny though how he couldn't even KO a blown up Cruiserweight in Johnny Nelson.
You say Ali would have no chance with Wlad. It always makes me laugh when people rubbsih Ali, the man that tamed the hardest punching HW ever in Foreman, FACT. The same puncher who came back as an old man, gave a prime Evander (who then way past his best schooled Tyson and gave Lewis 2 hard fights in his prime) all he could handle and then wiped out the man who won the titles from Evander second time around.
And then you dig up old records and comment on how many times they lost etc etc. Well a little lesson in boxing here. In the olden days fighters were not protected as they are today as the 0 was not the be all and end all of a career. Have you looked at how many times a year these guys actually fought? it certainly wasn't once or at best twice. They fought far more. You mention that Carnera lost a whopping 14 bouts. Well Evander is upto 10. Better tell him to stop now otherwise he was shit too I guess and Ray Robinson losing 19 well he is just total shit based on that alone, he must be!
At the end of the day Louis was the same size as Holyfield and Haye. Haye may not have looked good against Wlad but he fought the way he did to avoid being KO'd. Had Wlad fought a prime Evander he would have been taken to school in the same way Bowe was second time around, as Evander could take a shot and he'd be sticking the head in every time Wlad held. And before you get on to the first Bowe fight I've lost a brother and I know there is no way I would be fighting the week after as my mind wouldn't be where it should have been.
I don't think you can do this question like a'time machine', ie zapping Louis into 2012 and putting him in the ring with Vitali, or expecting someone like Wlad to have been around in the 1930's.
The truth is that nutrition, conditioning, training, the time between fights, the amount of punishment a fighter took before being stopped, the weigh in times - they are all different. Its also a fact that (at heavyweight) people are bigger now than they were in the 1930's.
A better way of imaging this is:
a) what if Joe Louis had been born in, say, 1985? He would have likely been a bigger guy, benefitting from all the advances I've mentioned above. I see a 6'5" 240 pounder. He would not have been the undisputed world champion for more than a decade though, as the alphabet boys politics would have got in the way. He may even have decided to go into NFL or NBA, as those are sports wiith a better chance of making a good living, which were not available to Louis in the 30's. I still think that this 'new' Joe Louis would have been a devastating fighter, crushing puncher, technically very sound and with great economy of motion (but with poor balance, so he was susceptible to flash knockdowns). I am a big fan of Joe, and I think he would have been very very competitive today ..... if he was born in the 1980's.
I think a few fighters COULD have beaten Louis if he was born in their era .... he had poor balance and he could be outboxed by a smart mover - plus he could get hit and hurt in there, so I think Cassius Clay (but not Muhammad Ali who was too immobile later and relied on his chin), George Foreman, Jack Johnson, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, Mike Tyson, Larry Holmes, Vitali Kitschko (but not Wlad) COULD have beaten Joe in their own era - but not that all of them WOULD
b) What if the great boxers of history had been active in the 1930's? They would have been smaller, less athletically fit, but tougher. They would not have had nutritional science and would have been fighting once a month to make a living. Assuming they fouight their way over years to get a title shot (only ONE champ, remember), and that they did not get seriously injured beforehand, they would be facing a sleek, tuned machine of a world champ in prime Louis. That Joe understood the referees of the time, he would be the crowd favourite, he absolutely terrified his opponents and had dynamite in either hand. He mowed people down every month. He did what the Klits are doing now and he cleaned out the heavyweight division TWICE. I don't think anybody gets born in the 1910's and beats the Brown Bomber in the 1930's.
Great post X.
Please! Joe would take his time and wait for Bruno to get tired and take him out late in the fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
I'm not so sure it would be late. An out of shape Witherspoon left it late with Bruno so you have to think an in shape one would do even better and Louis would have killed Witherspoon. Louis is not this fighter that people need to protect so he isn't forgotten people. He was a serious power punching HW boxer. He was the same size as Haye and Holyfield but had the power of Haye combined with the skill and toughness of Evander. This was a fighting machine that should never ever be underestimated!Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterPlease! Joe would take his time and wait for Bruno to get tired and take him out late in the fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
As open as Louis is for right hands, which he never really fixed and watching him be outboxed by the likes of Conn and Walcott, I'm thinking Ali would have gotten him.
Sorry but sanders had one of the most devastating left hands in boxing! For those on here who like to completely dismiss Sanders punching power, just take a look at some of his fucking fights. Listen and look at the impact of his shots. Case closed.
Corrie Sanders vs Carlos De Leon (Full Fight) - YouTube!
During the Rahman-Tua broadcast, Larry Merchant said Rahman told him that he wasn't at all suprised when Corrie Sanders KO'd Vladimir Klitschko a few weeks back. Rahman said that when they fought in 2000, Sanders hit him harder than he's ever been hit in his ENTIRE LIFE. And Rahman has faced some heavy hitters, Lennox Lewis, David Tua, Evander Holyfield, Oleg Maskaev, to name a few...
Try matching louis up with an eastern euro that actually was his contemporary! i.e legendary Soviet Korolev Nikolai Federovich:
Born February 14th 1917 and died February 12th 1974. He was a 4 -time Absolute Soviet Champion (1936,1937,1944, 1945), a 9 time Champion of the USSR (1936-1939,1945-1949) and Champion of the 1937 Socialist Olympics in Antwerp (The Russian alternative to the boycotted 1936 games in Berlin hosted by Nazi Germany), but he never got to go pro to really prove his stuff settling for a 110-14-2 record as a Russian hero.
http://ionenewsone.files.wordpress.c...s-photo-01.jpg
http://www.chadhowsefitness.com/blog...12/04/Wlad.jpg
Just stop with this old timer nonsense, joe would look like a child vs either klitschko!
Ali had the prefect style to beat Joe by out boxing him and staying away from the destructive punches from Loius.
Joe had power for his size for sure , but look at the guys who he was knocking out , he was great in his time , no way does he beat either of the brothers grim its just stupid to say so.
Just the same as Marciano wouldnt beat todays top guys.
It doesnt mean they were not great in their own time, its just facts.
Jesse Owens was great , but against Usain Bolt he would look foolish.
Yes you can say who would win Ketchel or Hagler for example , because they fought at the same weight , comparing HW'S is just impossible.
The big guys who fought in Joe's time where generally bums or freaks, not top conditioned fighters.
David Tua
Oliver McCall
Nicolay Valuev
Vitali Klitschko
George Foreman
Mike Tyson
about 50-50 vs Louis :
Lennox Lewis
Riddick Bowe
Ross Puritty
Joe Frazier
Corrie Sanders
Wladimir Klitschko
Evander Holyfield
Earnie Shavers
prime Max Schmelling (whom was quite shite but if past prime he KOd n almost prime Louis .. )
"Sonny" Liston
Larry Holmes
David Haye
Lee Q Murray
but if ppl could b transported through time then i believe many more would have done it .
:11fb8:
You forgot David Haye in your list.Quote:
Originally Posted by frankenfrank
And Brian London.
That film of his knockouts was poor quality but it did not hide a few, not just one glaring weakness. When he threw a right, he dropped his left. I'm thinking Ali. He stood on front of some of his opponents with a wide stance that almost looked as wide as a Horse stance in Karate for warmup drills without an opponent in front of you. Wasted movements were made when he was applying the explosive knockout combinations. Good fighters today pivot on the balls of their feet when throwing a hook. He would have been less prone to right hands and Schmeling would not have KO'd him if he was facing him at forty five degree angle and pumped his jab more to confuse the man who knocked him out. He seemed to be a big target and I liked Joe Louis for historical reasons. At least 90% of us weren't born or in some woman's arm being fed breast or bottle. Joe Louis had many flaws and so did the other fighters of his day but that's another story. today's fighters are part of a giant sports evolution, better trainers and better films with better nutrition. Well the rest you guys mentioned like size and strength so I am not going to beat a dead horse..
Baer was 6 foot 5 and weighed close to 260 poundsQuote:
Originally Posted by uwey
And please with the revisionist history.:vd: Its junk science. Who cares if Louis hit the deck a few times? He took about 60 power shots from Schmeling before he finally went down and took everything one of the biggest punchers in history had to offer in Baer. This notion that Louis could not take a punch by bigger men is perhaps one of the biggest urban legends in boxing history. And again about Marciano...talk about a reach. Thats like saying Jimmy Wilde was not that good cause he lost to Villa in his last fight.
Louis had the hand speed of Ali and punched about 5 times as hard. Louis had an actual triple left hook that he landed and each shot was as hard as the first. His right cross could stop a vehicle.
Of 25 successful defenses, 21 were won by knockout, 17 of those were ten counts and 5 in the first round. He also knocked out six men who held the heavyweight title.
Benton ranked him 1
Futch Ditto
Arcel Top 3
Tyson #1
Historians like
Fleischer #4 and #5 in many Ring publications
Callis #1
Sugar #2
Daniel #1
Carroll#1
Rose #4
Eskin#1
Loubet #1
Durant #1
Gallo #1
The Ring On many occasions # 2 behind Robinson as the greatest fighter of all time and #2 as an atg hev
Big Book of Boxing #1
Odd #2
I guess all these people and countless others have no clue what they are talking about.
And if not for the lost 4 years during the war who knows....
Agreed, Joe was the second greatest heavyweight ever behind Ali who had the exact style to beat him.
Thing is, Louis showed he was able to be outboxed by smaller men, and his weakness for a right hand was never ever fixed. It wasn't that he couldn't take shots, but considering the style and training of people in this era(like the Klitschko's) they would catch him every single time.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
Ali would have beaten Louis, Larry Holmes would have beaten Louis an in his prime Mike Tyson was probably the hardest and fastest puncher Louis would have ever faced.
The styles Louis came up against were NOTHING compared to the styles in boxing no more than 20 years later. Styles evolve, fighters evolve, and the reason you see no one using Joe Louis' style nowadays is because they'd be knocked out. That is as it is.
Whether or not Ali is better then Louis or sits at #1 or #2 is a debate w/o a finite conclusion. The suggestion that Louis could not compete today because of his style is ridiculous no offense. That is akin to saying the reason nobody fights like Robinson is because the style wouldn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by MajestyThing is, Louis showed he was able to be outboxed by smaller men, and his weakness for a right hand was never ever fixed. It wasn't that he couldn't take shots, but considering the style and training of people in this era(like the Klitschko's) they would catch him every single time.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
Ali would have beaten Louis, Larry Holmes would have beaten Louis an in his prime Mike Tyson was probably the hardest and fastest puncher Louis would have ever faced.
The styles Louis came up against were NOTHING compared to the styles in boxing no more than 20 years later. Styles evolve, fighters evolve, and the reason you see no one using Joe Louis' style nowadays is because they'd be knocked out. That is as it is.
Holmes could quite possibly beat Louis along with Tyson and Ali and one could add the likes of Dempsey and Lewis but I don't really agree that styles have evolved or fighters for that matter. Fighters today are manufactured with one goal in mind and boxing legacy is not it. Office chairs have evolved to with the plastic wheels and adjustments that fall apart just like most products in this throw away society. Made to fail. In large measure boxers today are a bunch of coddled wimps that fight maybe once or twice a year and imo have styles that are not near as diverse. I hear what you are saying and do not agree. Imo boxing is devolving and has been.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitWhether or not Ali is better then Louis or sits at #1 or #2 is a debate w/o a finite conclusion. The suggestion that Louis could not compete today because of his style is ridiculous no offense. That is akin to saying the reason nobody fights like Robinson is because the style wouldn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by MajestyThing is, Louis showed he was able to be outboxed by smaller men, and his weakness for a right hand was never ever fixed. It wasn't that he couldn't take shots, but considering the style and training of people in this era(like the Klitschko's) they would catch him every single time.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
Ali would have beaten Louis, Larry Holmes would have beaten Louis an in his prime Mike Tyson was probably the hardest and fastest puncher Louis would have ever faced.
The styles Louis came up against were NOTHING compared to the styles in boxing no more than 20 years later. Styles evolve, fighters evolve, and the reason you see no one using Joe Louis' style nowadays is because they'd be knocked out. That is as it is.
Holmes could quite possibly beat Louis along with Tyson and Ali and one could add the likes of Dempsey and Lewis but I don't really agree that styles have evolved or fighters for that matter. Fighters today are manufactured with one goal in mind and boxing legacy is not it. Office chairs have evolved to with the plastic wheels and adjustments that fall apart just like most products in this throw away society. Made to fail. In large measure boxers today are a bunch of coddled wimps that fight maybe once or twice a year and imo have styles that are not near as diverse. I hear what you are saying and do not agree. Imo boxing is devolving and has been.
No, boxers having no other choice in life but TO box is devolving. Not the style and additions to the science of it and the craft of it.
You're trying to make it like "well guys these days aren't as tough as guys back then so that equals boxing devolving" it doesn't.
You may say that there are boxers out there that wouldn't make it back then because the toughness isn't the same, the question is what boxers could have beaten Joe Louis in his prime.
Holmes, Ali, Tyson etc aren't the crop of "coddled weaklings" that you're talking about, we aren't just naming random Joe schmoe's that could beat Louis we're naming other all time greats. So the point you're trying to make at the end there is really moot in terms of who could beat Louis. Walk into a boxing gym 50 years ago, you learn certain things, walk into a boxing gym now, the advanced things you learned back then are the beginner things they are teaching now and there's techniques and strategies along with training methods and resources now that people didn't have 50 years ago. Boxing is constantly evolving, and you can't say "fighters aren't tough like they used to be" as a reason to justify that boxing isn't evolving. The most coddled person in the world can still be a savage in the ring if they have that instinct.
Not sure if it was you but you said, who knows what Louis would have done if he didn't go into the war support and exhibitions. Well what would ALI have done if he wasn't kept out of the ring so long? See the most well known points and greatest victories of Ali's career occurred when he was out of his prime and on the way down, so to imagine what he would have accomplished if he was active all those years in between that were taken from him is something to imagine.
Ali in his absolute prime would slaughter Joe Louis and it's not even a knock against Joe Louis' greatness. Ali was a very hard puncher and was underrated for his power, he had the best jab in the history of heavyweight boxing before Larry Holmes who pretty much learned it from him.
Joe Louis had power, but he was flat footed, he was plodding and he had trouble with people that knew how to box. Max Baer may have been tall but a master craft boxer he wasn't.
Ali would have jabbed Louis all night and constantly caught him with the right hand and Louis wasn't particularly fast either, Ali's handspeed was unimaginable at the time and Louis would have seen nothing like it. There was no other heavyweight in Louis' time that had the speed, the power, the footwork, the technique and the ability of a prime Ali. You could even make an argument that Sonny Liston would have given Joe Louis all he could handle, and we saw what Ali did to him.
Ali's style was all wrong for Joe Louis, it was the perfect counter to it, that plus Ali's other physical and mental(inside the ring) advantages over Louis tip it in his favor. Ali would have stopped Louis.
Tyson is another story entirely, Louis liked to plod forward and see what his opponent had to offer and use his jab to size up going after them and once he had them hurt he'd go in for the kill. Tyson in his prime would have bullrushed him and never given him a chance to relax. When you watch the first Schmeling fight you realize that Shmeling created a little bit of distance between him and Louis to where he was just out of range of Louis' jab and he'd catch him with a right hand. And Louis could be caught and hurt early as well as dropped. Tyson also had a better jab, better defense, better combinations and blistering speed. So I think it's safe to say that Tyson would have caught Louis early, and Louis who has been known to be caught cold would probably have hit the canvas. The question is if Louis would have been able to take Tyson's early bullrushing early and that's up for debate. However Tyson in his prime was a master at angles and was very good defensively and Cus would have created a perfect strategy to take out Louis and I wouldn't put it past him to be able to do it.
The thing is, Joe Louis was an all-time great, for his time. But his style remains rooted in that time along with the other heavyweights of that time and their styles. As boxing evolved so did styles, so did techniques, so did resources, so did athletes, and so did strategies. If Louis walked in against Ali or a Tyson or a Holmes with his 1930s mentality, while they were bringing their more modern ones, Louis would have gotten overwhelmed.
Nothing against Louis' greatness, but there's a reason his style worked back when it did, and why it wouldn't work now. Jack Johnson even saw the holes in Louis' game, that's why he picked Schmeling to beat him the first time around, and he did. What Schmeling "saw" was something Ali, and Tyson and Holmes would have saw. The problem is they'd have made Louis pay much much more dearly for it.