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 01-29-2008, 11:22 PM   #46
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 14,185
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Well, we can certainly ad Max Schmeling to that list, given that he actually DID beat Louis.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-30-2008, 04:11 AM   #47
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Well, we can certainly ad Max Schmeling to that list, given that he actually DID beat Louis.
The question is "Who would you expect to beat a prime Louis?" By this logic, we should say we would "expect" Rahman and McCall to beat Lennox Lewis. Louis wiped Schmeling out in their rematch, and if you hypothetically had them fight 10 times while both in their primes, I think we would all agree Louis would win well over half; hence, though Schmeling did manage to do it once, we would not "expect" Schmeling to beat a prime Louis.
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 06:40 AM   #48
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Yes, my question is not who "could" beat Louis, it is who would you EXPECT to win, who would you positively favour.
Basically, anyone who you'd give anything more than 50-50 chance deserves mentioning.

And it's Louis at his ABSOLUTE peak, who I'd say resembles someone who would KO Max Schmeling, rather than be KO'd by him.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 06:46 AM   #49
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,693
vCash: 238
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
That's a mistake on my part, what I meant is that Patterson would be a large, albeit live, underdog. With Patterson you have a small guy who moves very fast, has excellent handspeed, and punches extremely hard. If anybody's getting knocked out in the first three rounds, it's Louis IMO. In this case, Patterson does have a suspect chin, but in a battle of two guys who are offensive machines with suspect chins you have to give both guys a chance. Patterson liked to start fast, was hard to hit, and has enough power to hurt and/or KO Louis.
If anyone has a suspect chin, it's Patterson. And Patterson does not punch extremely hard. He's a good puncher, but how many blowouts did he have, despite facing mediocre opposition often?

We know this:

-Louis has a ton of first round and early stoppages. Patterson barely has KO's in less than 5 rounds.
-Louis was knocked out twice, once in 12 rounds and once in 7. Patterson was stopped more often, and twice in a single round.

Now, add the fact that Patterson has a sort of come-forward style and that Louis is a boxer-puncher, much like Liston, i think it has Louis KO1 written all over it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
I don't see what the problem is between comparing Conn (who gave Louis fits) to other fighters of his ilk. If there's any difference between Conn and guys like Tunney and Ali, it's that they were faster, bigger, and punched harder than him.

Conn isn't exactly an ATG in the heavyweight division.
Conn was faster than Tunney and Ali. You have to remember that Conn was so fast because he was a small guy. Ali is faster pound for pound perhaps, but in reality he is likely not to be as fast, while of course he is stronger, harder punching and more durable.

I'm not saying it's a wrong comparison, by the way, i'm just saying it's exaggarated a bit. You can just as easily say that Louis beats Ali because he had a great jab like Norton and Jones.


Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
Let's not consider the Baers to Foreman and Liston. It would obviously take a fighter of ATG material to stop the Bomber.

Let's not forget that Galento knocked him down. Two Ton got an asswhipping, yes, but if Galento can hit him...
If Cooper can knock Ali down and nearly out, imagine what bigger, better punchers like Liston and Foreman would do to him!




Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
I'm going to take for granted here that you understand the circumstances of the Ali fight. We don't say Johnson lost to Willard because of a "bad chin", do we?
Well, Foreman was dead exhausted in a mere 8 rounds when he was 25 years old. Johnson was exhausted after 26 rounds when he was 37 years old.

And what if Louis is still there by the 8th? Unlike Ali, he can hit extremely hard in return.

Even so, how does that erase the embarrassing knockdown by Young, or the fact that the only puncher who landed on him, Lyle, nearly had him out? I'm guessing that if Foreman had to fight 30 contenders like Louis did, we'd see a lot more negative things in his chin.


Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
I'd be willing to bet that Lyle punched harder than Schmeling, too.
Well, Lyle's puncher's resume is extremely thin. What good fighter did he stop? The only one i can think of a Earnie Shavers, who had a glass chin... all the other opponents went the distance or knocked Lyle out.

Schmeling stopped several top opponents, although he is a bit unproven against bigger men.


Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
In response to these two points -

1. Getting knocked out by a "weak" puncher means you have a suspect chin, yes, even if you're losing the fight anyways. Schmeling-Louis I wasn't a long, one-sided asswhipping, either. Schmeling was winning, but it wasn't Foreman-Frazier I in there.

2. Not all ranked contenders are created equal. Louis' era in particular was not exceptionally deep when it came to quality contenders.
1. Louis-Schmeling wasn't a one-sided beating, but it was a beating nonetheless. Schmeling wasn't a weak puncher. And doesn't Foreman, by your own definition, have a suspect chin as well, since he was knocked out by a weak puncher and knocked down by another weak puncher? Dito for Lyle.


Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
Schemling 1 was Louis' what, 27th fight? At this point, he'd already beaten Carnera and Max Baer (considered by many to be among his best wins). What bothers me about ranking Louis high H2H against his fellow ATGs is that he got knocked out by one of the best guys that he fought, when he was neither green nor old.
Well, he was two years into his career and getting sloppy in training. I think he proved that when he knocked out Schmeling in the rematch which wasn't even competitive. And what about other ATG's that he did knock out, like Baer, Walcott and Sharkey? The fact that Louis had such a dominant reign repressed contenders from developing and making a big name for theirselfes, too. You have to take that into account. If Ali hadn't taken that lay-off, his fights with Frazier would've carried less value because Frazier couldn't have risen to be a dominant champ himself.

Tell me which fighter faced 3 all time great champions within 2 years of their pro career and lost only one, which was later avenged by a first round knockout?





Quote:
Originally Posted by radianttwilight
I hate to use this phrase here, but why do you think people called it the "bum of the month club"? His resume is impressive because of what you mentioned, longevity, but there are black spots (and missing spots). How many ATGs did he run into and beat?

Reigning for eleven years is indeed quite a feat. I'll end this (long) post by pointing out that I only said 5-8 guys would be at best even money or betting favorites against the Bomber, and all of them are ATGs.

See my comments above. And what missing spots does his resume have?
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 08:55 AM   #50
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,890
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Sonny's jab I haven't studied every month of Ring magazine ratings to make a definitive judgment.

I disagree with you on some of these things.
I think Tommy Farr was a very good fighter. What's wrong with Lou Nova ?
Tommy Farr was a small fighter who would not be in the heavyweight business in a modern ear of heavyweight boxing. Lou Nova is a decent fighter, but having him ranked as the #1 guy??? Egads!


Quote:
Surely, Tony Galento EARNED his rating by knocking guys out.
Wrong. Galento was colorful mob connected journeyman with a punch. Simply check his records and you will see what I am talking about. Galento lost many matches to nobodies. He was stopped three times before facing Louis, and two of those people who stopped him were nobodies.

Joe Louis saw Galento flail away at ringside and figured he would give Galento a title shot. Galento was near the end of his career. Then something unexpected happened. Galento's nearly upset Louis. This fight proves how vulnerable Louis was to any many that can punch hard and land it on him. Is Louis was in there vs a more skilled puncher he would be in serious trouble. Anyway, Galento then defeated Lou Nova , then lost two straight via TKO to the Baer brothers.

Quote:
Joe Louis was cleaning up all decent opposition at quite a rate BEFORE AND AFTER he became champion, so he needs to be credited with shaping the ratings too.
Louis never meet Maxie Rosenbloom, who his management felt could defeat him. Rosenbloom was a skilled guy who threw a lot of punches, and was hard to hit on defense. Rosenbloom would have make Louis look bad. Maxie was one of those people with no power, but a great chin and defense. Indeed, Rosenbloom was only stopped 2 times in 298 fights! Toward the end of his career, Rosenbloom beat a #1 ranked contender in Nova, and beat many of the same people Joe Louis did such as Toles, Levinsky, Ettore, John Henry Lewis well before John Henry was shot. Louis beat a sick and shot John Henry, and only gave him a title shot because he needed money. Ronenbloom also fought and defeated the some black fighters that Louis did not in Tiger Fox, and Leroy Haynes. Even Bert Sugar says Louis avoided Slapsie Maxie.

Louis did not give black fighters like Obie Walker, Elmer Ray, George Godfrey, Turkey Thompson, or Lem Franklin title shots. Louis management was close to giving Elmer Ray a title shot, then saw him live at the Madision Sqaure Garden and changed their minds. So Louis did not fight the best out there in a down era of heavyweight boxing. To suggest he did is not factually true. Louis management used the color line in many cases.

Quote:
It's often totally subjective whether one group of rated fighters from 19--
are better or worse than the group from 15 or 25 years later.
Just watch the films, look at the ring records, then make a judgment call. The mid 1930's to mid 1940's were a down period in heavyweight boxing.

Quote:
Marciano had Don ****ell as his number 2 contender at one point. I think ****ell was a lesser fighter than Farr, or Nova, that's my opinion.
I agree, but Marciano never used a color line, and pretty much fight the best out there as champion.

Quote:
Creampuff puncher Willie Pastrano and decrepit old Archie Moorer were top contenders in the era Sonny Liston came up in. British "journeyman" fighters like Henry Cooper, Joe Erskine and **** Richardson made the cut back then too.
Check the ring magazine ratings. You'll see there were more rated cream puffs in the mid 30's to mid 40's.

Quote:
If Joe Louis's era was worst you cannot fault him because he clearly dominated his opposition in the vast majority of his fights.
Louis looked very good vs journeyman in most of his fights, but struggled vs the best fighters he fought in Schmeling, Conn, Pastor, Walcott, Farr, Godoy, Braddock, Galento and company. I don't think the all time #1 or #2 heavyweight should have troubles vs these type of fighters. No way.

Quote:
You say Joe Louis had "troubles" with the men he fought, but that's only if you ignore all the guys he knocked out EASILY.
Most of the fighters Louis fought were not that good to begin with and would be looking up a the lights vs other all time greats too. If Louis knocked everyone out easily, then why did he need so many re-matches? The answer is because he did not look good in the first fight, was sometimes knocked down, other times looked bad in distance fights.

Quote:
It's okay "imagining" others wouldn't have the same "trouble" but all those guys had bad days, and none of them dominated for as long as Joe Louis did. I deal with the reality, not imaginations. I guess we'd never have imagined Foreman getting decked by a creampuff puncher like Young if it hadn't happened. Wepner "the bayonne bleeder" lasting into the 15th against Ali ? No way.
Jimmy Young at his best was a very good fighter. However, who else did Foreman look bad against? No one really besides Ali. By Contrast, Louis had far more shaky performances vs people who were not even as good as Jimmy Young. See my point?

Quote:
Joe Louis suffered knockdowns in only FOUR out of TWENTY FIVE title defenses, and won only one (or perhaps two, according to you) reasonably disputed decisions. His record before winning the title is probably even more dominant, with only one loss (to Schmeling) as a blemish, and his record after retiring and relinquishing the title is not at all bad either.
Again, Louis is lucky to win at Madison Square Garden vs Godoy in 1940, and lucky to win vs Walcott in 1947 Madison Square Garden. I have seen both fight, and Louis lost them. They Walcott fight has audio. In fact, the Garden gave out a thunderous boo when Louis was announced as the winner vs Walcott, then gave Walcott a standing ovation. Louis body language before being announced as the winner was that of the loser.

I have studied this era of boxing, and it was crooked as a dog's back leg. Furthermore, Louis managers had a special deal with Madison Square Garden, and also picked Art Donovan who in my opinion was horrible on the scorecards in favor of Louis. Donnavan was so biased the Walcott camp insisted he could not ref / judge their 1947 match. In another fight Art Donnavan only gave 1 round of 15 to Tommy Farr. This is ****. If you honestly score fights correctly, Louis has two more losses on his resume, and does not win 25 title bouts in a row.

Last edited by Mendoza; 01-30-2008 at 09:10 AM.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 09:23 AM   #51
Ezzard
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Tunney, Johnson and Ali all have a great chance.

Dempsey would be the underdog but he could do it.

And, of course, Schmeling.

That's it.
Ezzard is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 09:38 AM   #52
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Mendoza,

Tony Galento was coming off three straight KOs at the end of 1937, over Al Ettore, Lorenzo Pack and Leroy Haynes (who you mention as a leading black fighter of the time). Galento extended his winning run to ELEVEN STRAIGHT STOPPAGE WINS by the time he fought Joe Louis, with a few "name" opponents (such as Nathan Mann) in there too.
Tell me how this isn't EARNING HIS RATING/SHOT ?

Tommy Farr was big enough at 6' and 205 pounds, a very good boxer with a decent chin, a young 24-25 year old with plenty of experience. I think he'd be rated if he were fighting today.

Some of your criticisms of the era, guys being ducked, and bad decisions are VALID, but boxing is not a perfect business, it never will be. These same things can be applied to most other champions.
All things considered, Louis was the most dominant of all the heavyweight champions.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 09:49 AM   #53
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Conn not gifted??? He was a great fighter. He was highly gifted as a fighter. Sure he had his faults. But We talking about a great pound for pound leaper imo. How can he not be natural gifted?? Very few fighters had his talents.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 09:53 AM   #54
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238
Conn not gifted??? He was a great fighter. He was highly gifted as a fighter. Sure he had his faults. But We talking about a great pound for pound leaper imo. How can he not be natural gifted?? Very few fighters had his talents.
i agree
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 10:02 AM   #55
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,890
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
Mendoza,

Tony Galento was coming off three straight KOs at the end of 1937, over Al Ettore, Lorenzo Pack and Leroy Haynes (who you mention as a leading black fighter of the time). Galento extended his winning run to ELEVEN STRAIGHT STOPPAGE WINS by the time he fought Joe Louis, with a few "name" opponents (such as Nathan Mann) in there too.
Tell me how this isn't EARNING HIS RATING/SHOT ?

Tommy Farr was big enough at 6' and 205 pounds, a very good boxer with a decent chin, a young 24-25 year old with plenty of experience. I think he'd be rated if he were fighting today.

Some of your criticisms of the era, guys being ducked, and bad decisions are VALID, but boxing is not a perfect business, it never will be. These same things can be applied to most other champions.

All things considered, Louis was the most dominant of all the heavyweight champions.
Farr would be meat today as a heavyweight. He was too small and did not hit hard enough. Yet look at the trouble Farr gave Louis.

Most dominant champion to can mean many things. Louis was a great fighter, but I do not think he fought in a talented era. I think he avoided some of the top talent in his own era as well which compounds the problem.

I feel that Louis received two favorable decisions, and had either decision been judged correctly, Louis does not have 25 title defenses in a row, which is his #1 claim to greatness. In addition, Louis was shaky in some fights vs competition that I feel would not give other all time great as many fits. Louis gets a boost from the media, and for being a hero. Televison can be a powerful medium for historians who do not study ring records or break down films the way I and some other people do. When you tally it all up, I just do not objectively see or read a #1 or #2 all time heavy. Top 5 for me, with #4 or #5 being reserved for Louis

I have pretty much said what I want to say here, so I'll bow out. However I can post a few write up on Louis' fights if anyone wants to see them. Some here may be shocked at how close Louis' distance battles were in the eyes of the press vs guys like Farr, Godoy or Pastor, or how he was being out boxed vs others until landing the KO blow.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 10:05 AM   #56
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Mendoza, can you post the first Louis-Pastor fight report as well as the first Godoy report and anything else you have?

Also who would you rate as ur number one or two heavyweight?
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 10:13 AM   #57
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Mendoza,
I was hoping you might explain why Galento didn't earn that rating.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 10:40 AM   #58
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Also, Mendoza, to an earlier post of yours where I had simply said "I disagree with all your points" you indicated it would be helpful if I elaborated, which I did, but you have so far failed to even acknowledge my counter-points. I was willing to leave it at a simple statement of disagreement but I thought if you want debate, i'd do you the courtesy of debating.

Obviously, some of it's not worth debating, for example how Tommy Farr would do in today's scene, because there's nothing to ****yze there it's all guess work.

But historical issues, like who earned a rating and who did not, or ****ysis of Louis's stance and style are things where common ground and mutual learning/sharing of ideas is possible.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 10:56 AM   #59
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,890
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
Also, Mendoza, to an earlier post of yours where I had simply said "I disagree with all your points" you indicated it would be helpful if I elaborated, which I did, but you have so far failed to even acknowledge my counter-points. I was willing to leave it at a simple statement of disagreement but I thought if you want debate, i'd do you the courtesy of debating.

Obviously, some of it's not worth debating, for example how Tommy Farr would do in today's scene, because there's nothing to ****yze there it's all guess work.

But historical issues, like who earned a rating and who did not, or ****ysis of Louis's stance and style are things where common ground and mutual learning/sharing of ideas is possible.
There are no heavies like Tommy Farr today. So why should be assume that a person like Farr would be ranked today? See my point? IMO Farr would not be ranked in the 80's 90's, or 00's at heavy. The style of the small boxer with little power is all but extinct in modern heavyweight boxing. Only a master boxer with a great chin, good defense, with a twist on his style ( Byrd ) can be compared to Farr. And Byrd was better than Farr. I hope that addresses that point.

Galento has a journeyman record, and many losses and draws to nobodies. He was ranked because the era he fought in lacked talent, and because he was " connected ". Galento did win a few big fights, but I beleive the above comments best explain why he had the opportunity to be ranked. Like Farr, Galento would not be ranked today at all.

I did not reply to Louis low guard, slow / predictable footwork, or stick you face forward stance because it is clearly there to see on film, and really is not debatable. Just watch a few of his fights or read the press clippings of the time and you will see these flaws.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2008, 11:07 AM   #60
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Who would you expect to beat Joe Louis at his absolute peak ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
There are no heavies like Tommy Farr today. So why should be assume that a person like Farr would be ranked today? See my point? IMO Farr would not be ranked in the 80's 90's, or 00's at heavy. The style of the small boxer with little power is all but extinct in modern heavyweight boxing. Only a master boxer with a great chin, good defense, and a twist on his style ( Byrd ) can be compared to Farr. And Byrd was better than Farr. I hope that addresses that point.
I think Farr was better than Byrd.
But like I said, not worth debating.

Quote:
Galento has a journeyman record, and many losses and draws to nobodies. He was ranked because the era he fought in lacked talent, and because he was " connected ". Galento did win a few big fights, but I beleive the above comments best explain why he had the opportunity to be ranked. Like Farr, Galento would not be ranked today at all.
Galento knocked out some of the better fighters of the time, including some of the black fighters who you might criticize Louis for not fighting.
Of course Galento got the opportunities because he was "connected". Same applies to most, if not ALL, fighters.

You think all the heavyweight fighters of the era of were relatively poor ability.

Quote:
I did not reply to Louis low guard, slow / predictable footwork, or stick you face forward stance because it is clearly there to see on film, and really is not debatable. Just watch a few of his fights or read the press clippings of the time and you will see these flaws.
Boxing trainers like Eddie Futch, Freddie Roach and Buddy McGirt, and countless other people, consider Joe Louis the least flawed of all heavyweight champions.
Joe Louis look brilliant to me on film, and I'm in good company and the vast majority.
 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 04:50 AM.


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