Joe Louis vs The Klitschko Brothers

[janitor]

Originally Posted by Seamus

Who hit the deck more often against more mediocre HEAVYweight opposition, Waldo or Joseph Barrow?

Louis was clearly a lot harder to stop than Wlad.

It isn't even competitive.

Why would you choose to grade them by the situations in which they were dropped, when the situations where they were actualy stopped (the ultimate objective) tell a different story?

[Nighttrain]

Joe Louis suffers from the fact that he was so completely dominant, his stalking style and his dead pan expression while destroying everyone! He was so great he made it look too easy! The fact that his reign exceeded his prime also casts an unfair and inaccurate light on his peak abilities.
Another commonly held inaccuracy is the foolish claim that he faced weak opposition. Wrong! Boxing received a lion share of potential athletes seeking to make their living in athletics . Boxing was one of, if not America's most popular sports, but also a major source of entertainment during the period. Boxing gyms much more prolific during the period offered young people a place to not only recreate but provide instruction on boxing fundamentals . Boxing was also present on school campuses further drilling the fundamentals much lacking today. The precedent had already been set of the million dollar purse making the allure irresistible in a world ravaged by the Great Depression.
Throughout these forums there are countless examples given of racial discrimination raising its ugly head. However, the fact remains that boxing provided the biggest and best sporting opportunity for all underprivileged to seek fortune and fame. Keep in mind that Louis won his title over a decade prior Jackie Robinson playing for Brooklyn or the reintegration of African Americans into the NFL! It beyond comprehension that Joe Louis performed carrying not only the hopes and dreams of African Americans, while having to live up to being “a credit to his race”.
It is not a close question. Joe Louis by KO over Vitali, Wlad and Shemp.

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by janitor

Why would you choose to grade them by the situations in which they were dropped, when the situations where they were actualy stopped (the ultimate objective) tell a different story?

I can't answer that for Seamus, but how do you have the count (knockdowns) ?

I think Louis was down 10 times in total (including twice for the count).
I think Wladimir is on at least 10 too.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by Legend X

I can't answer that for Seamus, but how do you have the count (knockdowns) ?

I think Louis was down 10 times in total (including twice for the count).
I think Wladimir is on at least 10 too.

I have it the same.

I have never been a fan of using the number of times a fighter was knocked down as a measure of their chin though.

By that logic a guy who is put down for the count by a single punch, has a better chin than somebody who is decked three times and gets up three times to win the fight.

The real question is whether it was possible to translate those knockdowns into a win.

[Webbiano]

Originally Posted by Legend X

I can't answer that for Seamus, but how do you have the count (knockdowns) ?

I think Louis was down 10 times in total (including twice for the count).
I think Wladimir is on at least 10 too.

Wlad over 10 I think. He was dropped 3 times against Peter and 4 against Corrie. 1 against Purity, 1 against Brewster, 1 against Williamson and 1 against Pannel. Thought it would be more than 11 but still, over 10

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by janitor

I have it the same.

I have never been a fan of using the number of times a fighter was knocked down as a measure of their chin though.

By that logic a guy who is put down for the count by a single punch, has a better chin than somebody who is decked three times and gets up three times to win the fight.

The real question is whether it was possible to translate those knockdowns into a win.

Especially given that Louis didn't lose the extra point for the KD. For him there was additional reason to take that risk if he got caught coming forwards and put on his seat, so what? He shrugged off most of these KD's like they were nothing at all

Wlad on the other hand looked disorganised and hurt even when the guy putting the pressure on moves at 0.00005 meteres per second.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by Legend X

Wlad was decked by :

Steve Pannell
Ross Purrity
Corrie Sanders
Lamon Brewster
DeVaryl Williamson
Sam Peter

Louis was decked by :

Max Schmeling
Jimmy Braddock
Tony Galento
Buddy Baer
Jersey Joe Walcott
Rocky Marciano


Am I forgeting any ?

Wlad's game changed and he hasn't been KD'ed since Peter, arguably against better opposition. Louis kept getting knocked down throughout his career, so is the more hittable in my view

Originally Posted by McGrain

Especially given that Louis didn't lose the extra point for the KD. For him there was additional reason to take that risk if he got caught coming forwards and put on his seat, so what? He shrugged off most of these KD's like they were nothing at all

Wlad on the other hand looked disorganised and hurt even when the guy putting the pressure on moves at 0.00005 meteres per second.

What a spurious argument, so Louis took tactical knock downs did he what a fucking genius. I'm sure it had nothing to do with him being caught clean on the button and/or being off balance. If he takes extra risks leaving himself open against Wlad, he'll be leaving himself open to the biggest, fastest, heavyset, most accurate right hand he'd ever come across, by a distance

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

What a spurious argument, so Louis took tactical knock downs did he what a fucking genius.

No. That's something you just made up in your head, and then typed.

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

Wlad's game changed and he hasn't been KD'ed since Peter, arguably against better opposition. Louis kept getting knocked down throughout his career, so is the more hittable in my view

True, Wladimir has gone his last 12 fights without hitting the deck. But in the spell before that he's been knocked down or out in 4 of his last 7 fights !

Joe Louis went 9 fights without hitting the deck between the Galento and Baer fights, at his peak. He went 9 fights without being knocked down between Walcott and Marciano at the end of his career. He went his first 24 fights without getting knocked down.

I don't see much difference, to be honest.

[Nightcrawler]

Originally Posted by Legend X

True, Wladimir has gone his last 12 fights without hitting the deck. But in the spell before that he's been knocked down or out in 4 of his last 7 fights !

Joe Louis went 9 fights without hitting the deck between the Galento and Baer fights, at his peak. He went 9 fights without being knocked down between Walcott and Marciano at the end of his career. He went his first 24 fights without getting knocked down.

I don't see much difference, to be honest.

nor do i and like louis, he kept getting up. unlike louis, he didn't go on to beat the shit out of guys.

as a question of chin ONLY, i'm not seeing a compelling argument for why either is notably better

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by McGrain

You're going to hear about the wildcard in the next part, fof, the punch most crucial to Louis taking on either Klitschko.

Cool. Looking forward to reading it.