boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-04-2013, 09:32 AM   #301
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommo View Post
And you Janitor have just made a likewise such assumption... Except mine IS somewhat supported by some evidence!
Thats just the point, I don't.

I am very clkear in saying that I don't know.

An astute observer of boxing never places heavy weighting upon his predictions about how two fighters from different eras would fare head to head.

Placing heavy weighting on your H2H predictions, and basing thse predictions upon assumptions, are bot marks of a reckless boxing observer.

Quote:
Ok Ipay, look at Louis' opponents. They were practically all CW's. Lennox wouldn't even be allowed to knock out those opponents because it would be dangerous for their health and unfair. The opponents of Louis that were bigger were oafs. There was no such thing as a "skilled superheavyweight" back in Louis' day. Those big guys were so bad they would not even suffice as sparring partners for Lewis, but would make decent human punching bags.
First you say "Louis's oponents were weaker because they were smaller".

Then you say "The big fighters Louis beat didn't count because they were oafs" thereby admiting that being big dosn't make you better.

You can't have it bot ways.

Either bigger opponents make you better, or they don't.

Do you think that I couldn't just say "oh well Lewis was a glass jawed oaf so he dosn't count"?

Quote:
Lewis' opponents on the other hand were all natural HW's and Lewis happens to have also the highest quality opponents of any HW in history in proportion to his total fights and comparable to Wlad's in total. Louis fought HEAPS of bums.
Again this is totaly untrue.

Louis's opponents had on average a much higher ranking than Lewis's or Wlads.

It is not even close in fact.

Even if we accepted your argument that Lewis's era was much stronger, he would still have a far morte padded record relative to the era.

Quote:
Louis records consists mainly of bums and cruisers. He got smacked out by 193lb Schmelling, knocked out of the ring by Baer, beaten senseless by a midget Marciano and swatted down by an emperor penguin Tony Galento. Lewis would NEVER be threatened by such weak opposition. His only defeats were from freak big punches from HUGE punchers which happens from time to time at HW today because the punches are so much harder than Louis' day chances of upsets are far higher. He avenged these losses in convincing fashion.
Yes but it didn't happen to Louis!

Louis was never stopped by a single punch from any opoonent, however big or however hard they hit.

Louis was never beaten by a fighter who did not become undisputed champion, outside of the fight with Louis.

Quote:
When adjusted for bums and cruisers it turns out Lewis has among the very best performances in championship fights with Louis far below and Louis' total record is so green he doesn't rate amongst the top 12 HW's of the 90's.
Objective ****ysts do not adjust fighters records, they accept the record as they stand.

The only people who seek to delete wins over ranked oponents from a fighters record are people trying to distort the facts to suit their own agenda.

Do you think that I couldn't simply decide to delete every oponent of Lewis's record who was not ranked in the top 10?

Quote:
Also, look at Joe's picture, then look at Rahman, Lewis, McCall, Tyson, Holyfield, Morrison, Botha, Akinwande, Grant, Ruddock, Golotta, Vitali and Bowe.
No, you don't look at their picture because it is boxing, not body building or male modeling.

Quote:
Watch their fights. Any of these guys would beat the living **** out of Louis and EVERYBODY KNOWS IT! You'll just defend Louis anyway because of some hero worship. But don't kid yourself mate. He'd wish he never laced up the gloves if he ever had to face the lion!
I have actualy watched all of Louis's fights, and concluded that he looks much more impresive on film than any of the heavyweights of the 90s.

I sincerely doubt that you even know what to look for when you compare two boxers on film, because the only thing you seem to notice is the size of their biceps!
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-04-2013, 10:11 AM   #302
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

In the hope of silencing the guff about Joe Louis having a padded record, I am going to present some cold hard facts.

Total number of fights against top 10 ranked opponents:

Joe Louis 31
Muhammad Ali 34
Lennox Lewis 15

Percentage of total career fights which were against top 10 ranked opponents:

Joe Louis 47%
Muhammad Ali 62%
Lennox Lewis 37%

Total number of successful defences of the undisputed title:

Joe Louis 26
Muhammad Ali 21
Lennox Lewis 7

These are the cold hard statistics, about what these men did in their respective eras. I don't need to add that Lewis fares a lot better in this comparison than most fighters of his era. If we set Louis and Ali's record's on Wlad's, then we would realy see some destruction.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2013, 12:34 PM   #303
dinovelvet
Up Top To The Head
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 10,706
vCash: 527
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

Mercer would probably of got the decision against Lewis if the fight was a 12 rounder.
Lewis never ko'd anybody late in a fight throughout his entire career and Mercer was coming on strong.

Old Holmes gave a fresher Ray a full 12 round boxing lesson using his boxing brain and superior ring craft.

Theres levels to this here game and Holmes , Louis ,Tyson etc were a level above Lewis , whose size was really the best thing he had going for him.
dinovelvet is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2013, 07:16 AM   #304
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommo View Post
Actually is is both ways. Louis' smaller opponents were the more skilled opponents. The ones who were well trained boxers for the era. It just so happens Louis was also well trained and bigger. However the monsters that Louis beat were not of comparable skill level to Louis himself.
This is the case in every era.

Nobody disputed that Floyd Mayweather is much more skilled than Wladamir Klitschko for example.

Quote:
Lewis is both big and skilled, something that was unheard of in Louis' time.
Depends what you mean by skilled.

I will grant you that Lewis is the best example of a superheavyweigth we have seen, but a lot of the superheavyweights that he built his record against were themselves not technical marvels.

Quote:
This I'm not sure about where your coming from? Seems to me that from the moment Lewis was near the top, after the initial climb in ranks, just like any champion boxer, would have been fighting a top 10 opponent by atleast one of the sanctioning bodies in all of his subsequent fights! He would not be allowed to otherwise! If it turns out that Lewis amassed less total victories over such opponents because he had less fights it still has to count that most of the opponents fought were mathematically worthless even for the previous eras even if they were top 10 listed. It's the sign of a weak era. Louis' was definitely a weak era, and Ali's was the strongest of the weak eras! Your's is a cherry picked statistic.
I will explain it to you again:

Lewis had 41 fights and 37% of them were against ranked oponents.

Louis had 66 fights and 47% of them were against ranked oponents.

Louis fought more than twice as many ranked oponents as Lewis, and had more than three times as many title defences.

Therfore Louis has the deeper record and the less padded record.

These are not my opinions, they are the cold hard facts.

Quote:
Presenting the total wins in championship fights and the total win/loss/fight/ko record of the boxers after deleting mathematical bums and CW's is by far the most accurate judge of quality.
It is not accurtate, becase you are deleting oponents that you have absolutely no justification for deleting.

The statistics above show you that you are obviously deleting guys from Louis's record, that would not get deleted from Lewis's.

You are also measuring Louis's oppnents against a weight class that they were not fighting in, and which did not exist at the time.

The very fact that you are "deleting" oponents from one fighters record, shows that you are trying to fidle the figures.

Quote:
Yes but that's the point Janitor, Louis was in a featherfisted era, the chances of punchers upset was far lower for Louis to enjoy. It shows that when Wlad or Lewis lost in that manner they were out boxing their opponents, a sign of their superior skill level. Louis and Ali actually got out boxed!
There is no such thing as a feather fisted era.

The one thing that you will find in any era however weak, is a guy who can hit like a ton of bricks.

Rahman wasn't a knockout artist, even by the standards of his era, he was a fair puncher.

Truth be told, Herbie Hide and David Haye are probably far more dangerous punchers.

There is a Rahman in every era, and about three Puritys.

Quote:
Besides, despite the odds of getting knocked out being lower for them they still had some lucky escapes. Their records could look very different really. If you're basing h2h ability on luck then that's ridiculous. Ali for instance without gifted decisions and luck in rematches would be a B level boxer.
The difference betwee Louis and Ali, and Lewis and Klitsschko, is not that the former did not have problems with fighters like Brewster and Rahman, its that they always found a way to come back and win.

That is why they are rightly rated higher.

Quote:
Oh yes they do. Any bookkeeper in the world would necessarily do that to get the clearest picture possible who would actually win because that's all that matters to them. If you leave cruisers on it's inacurate because any modern HW could line up 20 cruisers and knock every one of them straight out. Bums must also be deleted otherwise Sonny Liston, Lamar Clarke and Butterbean are the greatest.
No they don't.

A bookkeeper or other objective observer would say, this is the fighters record and this is what they did.

These are the facts.

No objective observer deletes fights from a fighters record.

Quote:
The people who delete cherry picked opponents or otherwise worthless ones for comparitive purposes are the ones trying to undertand an outcome probability for how it really is not how they want it to be. Your method is merely a cherry picked statistic which if true as you say it is, really tells us nothing except how poor the quality of the era was, further derailing your former champs.
The statistics above show that Lewis has far more cherry picked opponents than Lewis, so the very fact that you have deleted morte of Louis's opponents shows that there is something wrong with your method.

Even if a fighter is weaked or is cherry picked, they still f*****g beat them!

If you felt that the quality of Lewis's record was higher, the legitimate way to prove it would be by a statistical breakdown as I have done, rather than deleting oponents from Louis's record untill you get the result you want.

You can't do this because the statistics favour Louis.

Quote:
Boxing is not bodybuilding you are right about that. But the size and condition of the fighters does help to paint an accurate picture of the difference between modern athletes in boxing and any sport compared to their ancestors. People who know nothing of boxing or the boxers in question can look and see immediately without any further ****ysis that the likelihood of Louis or Ali being successful against them is very low.
Thats just the point, they cant.

I could find you 20 journeymen who look far more imposing than Steve Cuningham, and he would beat every single one.

If what a fighter looked like was any indicator, then I could find some body builder type who looked far more imposing than Wladamir Klitschko.

If size was as important as you say, then the sport would be dominated by 300lb fighters.

Quote:
Then you are watching with rose coloured glasses on my friend because I see lack of coordination, rudimentary skills, even worse opponents, sluggish movements and weaker punches. Lewis' fights are breathtaking by comparison! I take notice of everything when I watch. You seem to only notice who's famous. Watch again I urge you and pretend you didn't even know of Louis, look at the quality of the fighter he is doing battle with.
I can asure you that I have watched far more fight films than you have, and am much better at ****ysing fights.

In fact I would be interested to hear you give a breakdown of exactly how Lewis's oppnents are more skilled, and what they do that Louis's dont.

Quote:
The mere fact for instance that Louis vs Schmelling was a chapionship HW fight in the 30's is enough evidence of how poor the era was!
That was a fight between the champion and the #1 contender, something which has not happened for about ten years.

In this era we got such treats as Nicolai Valuev vs Owen Beck.

That Louis has a better record is fact.

That Lewis fought in a better era is assumption.

Even if you accept that Lewis fought in a better era, determining exactly how much better it was is truly impossible.

Quote:
I think even the most ardent US fans know deep down that Lewis would KO Louis in 1. How it could go otherwise I don't know how you could reach such a conclusion!
I was born and live in the UK, I have studied boxing for many years, and it is my firm beleif that Joe Louis would knock out Lennox Lewis.

I don't base this opinion on his record, I base it on the point tha Louis is by far the best heavyweight finisher I have ever seen on film.

It is of course just my opinion.

What I am certain of however, is that a finisher like Louis cannot be counted out against any opponent with a chin.

Last edited by janitor; 07-05-2013 at 07:26 AM.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 05:00 PM   #305
ETM
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

One thing you can say for Joe Louis is that he fought the top fighters very early in his career. He turned pro in `34 and he was facing former heavyweight champions by `35. It was uncommon. He was that good.

Joe had the greatest left hand in the history of the heavyweight division thanks to Mr Blackburn.
ETM is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2013, 05:11 PM   #306
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

Quote:
Originally Posted by ETM View Post
One thing you can say for Joe Louis is that he fought the top fighters very early in his career. He turned pro in `34 and he was facing former heavyweight champions by `35. It was uncommon. He was that good.

Joe had the greatest left hand in the history of the heavyweight division thanks to Mr Blackburn.
The guy was matched with the former heavyweight champion, who outweighed him by 60lbs, 9 months after his professional debut.
14 months after his professional debut, he took on his successor, who was the hardest puncher of the era.

He later went on to hold the heavyweight title hostage for longer than Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister.

Of his 66 professional fights, 47% were against fighters currently ranked in the top 10, and a whopping 77% were against fighters who were ranked at some stage of their career!

It is legitimate to question the strength of his era, but it is hard to ask him to do more with it.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 12:28 AM   #307
Vanboxingfan
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,007
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

Again Janitor, nobody is questions Louis' accomplishments in his era, This is why he's universally ranked ahead of Lewis in an ATG sense. But that doesn't mean he could beat Lewis h2h. I simply don't think he could, at least not he best version of Lewis. But it's a red herring to keep on commenting on Louis's accomplishments unless they pertain to how he would be bet Lewis in a h2h match.
Vanboxingfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 07:27 AM   #308
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanboxingfan View Post
Again Janitor, nobody is questions Louis' accomplishments in his era, This is why he's universally ranked ahead of Lewis in an ATG sense. But that doesn't mean he could beat Lewis h2h. I simply don't think he could, at least not he best version of Lewis. But it's a red herring to keep on commenting on Louis's accomplishments unless they pertain to how he would be bet Lewis in a h2h match.
Since Lewis retired the idea seems to have crystallised in the consciousness of many, that he was some sort of invincible monster head to head. This is really not the case. Great though he was, he is still the only top 10 all time heavyweight to be stopped by a single punch that found the mark.

Louis was the best finisher the heavyweight division ever produced, and that is exactly the fighter that poses the greatest threat to Lewis. You really donít need a lot of imagination to see how he might win this fight.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2013, 06:14 PM   #309
Vanboxingfan
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,007
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
Since Lewis retired the idea seems to have crystallised in the consciousness of many, that he was some sort of invincible monster head to head. This is really not the case. Great though he was, he is still the only top 10 all time heavyweight to be stopped by a single punch that found the mark.

Louis was the best finisher the heavyweight division ever produced, and that is exactly the fighter that poses the greatest threat to Lewis. You really donít need a lot of imagination to see how he might win this fight.

You might. The way I see it, Lewis got caught against McCall while both were trying to land. At that time Lewis was still a work in progress, the same as can be said when Louis lost against Schmeling. The only difference is Lewis was caught with a single punch, and Schmeling caught Louis repeatedly. not sure how that becomes a plus for Louis but whatever.

The second loss Lewis received was pure stupidity on his part. He's hands were down, his chin sticking out. That's something Louis would never do in entire career, never mind when he became champ. That version of Lewis could lose to 20 dozen fighters if that's the one you feel would be stepping in the ring with Louis. But the version such as the Lewis who showed up at the Rahman rematch was an entirely different fighter, as was the one who walked through Ruddock, Golota and Grant, and gave a boxing lesson to Tua. I personally tend to think it would be one of these versions of Lewis that Louis would be facing. On the flip side, Lewis would likely be facing the Louis who rematched Schmeling as opposed to the one he lost to.

It's when these versions of the fighters are ****yzed that I give the nod to Lewis.
Vanboxingfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2013, 06:46 PM   #310
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,962
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanboxingfan View Post
You might. The way I see it, Lewis got caught against McCall while both were trying to land. At that time Lewis was still a work in progress, the same as can be said when Louis lost against Schmeling. The only difference is Lewis was caught with a single punch, and Schmeling caught Louis repeatedly. not sure how that becomes a plus for Louis but whatever.
It is admitedly a questionable plus, but it does mean that it took a sustained beating over the course of the fight to stop Louis, which is inherantly harder to repeat.

Quote:
The second loss Lewis received was pure stupidity on his part. He's hands were down, his chin sticking out. That's something Louis would never do in entire career, never mind when he became champ. That version of Lewis could lose to 20 dozen fighters if that's the one you feel would be stepping in the ring with Louis. But the version such as the Lewis who showed up at the Rahman rematch was an entirely different fighter, as was the one who walked through Ruddock, Golota and Grant, and gave a boxing lesson to Tua. I personally tend to think it would be one of these versions of Lewis that Louis would be facing. On the flip side, Lewis would likely be facing the Louis who rematched Schmeling as opposed to the one he lost to.

It's when these versions of the fighters are ****yzed that I give the nod to Lewis.
This is by no means a badly thought out viewpoint, but I have jumped the other way. I think that while McCall and Rahman got their opportunity by luck, Louis would be able to manufacture it.

Obviously with fighters of this calibre, anything can happen.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2013, 09:07 PM   #311
Vanboxingfan
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,007
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Lennox Lewis VS Joe Louis

[quote=janitor;15552897]
Quote:

It is admitedly a questionable plus, but it does mean that it took a sustained beating over the course of the fight to stop Louis, which is inherantly harder to repeat. .
or it could mean an inherent flaw which can very easily be repeated.



[quote=janitor;15552897]
Quote:
This is by no means a badly thought out viewpoint, but I have jumped the other way. I think that while McCall and Rahman got their opportunity by luck, Louis would be able to manufacture it. .
Depends on whether or not he had the time to enact such a plan, given what was likely to be coming his way and given the discrepancy in size, power, reach and height.

[quote=janitor;15552897]
Quote:
Obviously with fighters of this calibre, anything can happen.

Yes, indeed
Vanboxingfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015