Butter Bean Esch vs Tony Galento

[bigG]

butterbean couldnt tie tony galentos laces.....or his own..

[bigG]

butterbean couldnt tie tony galentos boot laces.....or his own..

[Amsterdam]

Originally Posted by janitor

Louis would have to take a few bombs to get the job done which he could but every time Foreman opens up he is going to get countered with wiched combos.

If a relatvely crude counterpuncher like Lyle could make Foreman pay for his open offense then a sharpshooter like Louis is big trouble.

Louis' is not taking Foreman's flush bombs Janny. You make it sound as if Louis is the most complete fighter ever technically, it would be odd if Foreman landed yes?

But Foreman immediatley gets close, Louis' jab doesn't land and Foreman sends a right hand over it, easily timed... what next? Louis drops, as would most from a flush Foreman right.

You're judging this whole thing from a historical fans outlook, which is fine, but you've attributed nothing to the bare bones technical outlook that I have been debating with CT with, because that's not something that you study.

I just find it odd that you confidently confide in your material here as if it's the cemented law.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Amsterdam

But Foreman immediatley gets close, Louis' jab doesn't land and Foreman sends a right hand over it, easily timed... what next? Louis drops, as would most from a flush Foreman right.

I agree that this is what happens if Louis tries to jab when Foreman makes range.

If this is the plan Louis carries out he would lose. But if he fights the right plan, the one he normally used when drawing (or as in this case, not) a fighter onto him - time him with hard punches - the situation is reversed. Foreman hits trouble. Tyson may be a better finisher than Dempsey but I don't think many others are.

KO 1 alright bro, but not the way you are leaning!

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by janitor

Louis would have to take a few bombs to get the job done which he could but every time Foreman opens up he is going to get countered with wiched combos.

If a relatvely crude counterpuncher like Lyle could make Foreman pay for his open offense then a sharpshooter like Louis is big trouble.

To be fair,

You're drawing a conclusion based on a single performance of Foreman's. How many performances did Louis have of this description? Let's see, Schmeling I, Galento, Baer, Braddock, Mauriello, Walcott.

[Amsterdam]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

To be fair,

You're drawing a conclusion based on a single performance of Foreman's. How many performances did Louis have of this description? Let's see, Schmeling I, Galento, Baer, Braddock, Mauriello, Walcott.

It doesn't matter in the slightest which fighters Janny is comparing, because Janny has little idea of anything other than material that he's learned and read, Lyle would easily beat Louis to that fact, just look at my technical analysis of him and Foreman, but then consider natural intangibles that Foreman has, that Louis does not, much to the dismay of classic boxing fans.

CT hopefully comes back in...

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Amsterdam

It isn't by much.

I'll name a boxer-puncher who's more complete easily, Lennox Lewis.

Is Lennox Lewis a carticularly complete boxer puncher let us look.

Good jab good mid range ofense OK infighting skills.

How many times have you seen Lewis throw a punch that traveled only twelve inches?

If the answer is not many then he is not among the premier league of infighters.

How well could Lewis feint or parry?

He is a fairly good textbook boxer puncher but lacks finesse and refinment.

Want another one? Larry Holmes

I think many of the same obsevations aply.

Want another one? Sonny Liston

This is the nearest you have come to a valid example. Liston can atleast work the inside outside and mid range with finesse and present a low target coming in but he is much slower and less polished.

Want another one who's not an ATG? Tony Tucker

I won't dignify that with a response.

Clubbing right over that lazy jab, everytime, immediatley....

Sorry.

Nobody is hitting Louis with a clubing punch of any sort. The man is not an idiot.

He would hold his hand slightly low to draw one of those haymakers, time it and then counter with a combination like he did against Max Baer when he tried exactly the same trick.

How does Louis not get backed into the corner and not get timed with a right hand or some of those hooks that Foreman is famous for?

Louis would wan't to back up. He would fight on the back foot and force Forman to walk into his combinations thus increasing their efect. when Louis is on the ropes he will just step inside and then things will get even worse for Foreman.

In a fight between two big punchers the guy coming forward gets his brains scrambled exceptions are few and far between.

His footwork is that bad, his hands are low and his timing is not comparable, nor his movement speed.

Louis's footwaork is economical but he could use movment when he wanted to eg Godoy Fight.

His timing was perfect. Why do you think his oponents hell down as if hit by lightning when he wen't to finish them?

[Decebal]

This is the best thread I have enjoyed here at ESB!

[mr. magoo]

[quote=janitor][quote]

Nobody is hitting Louis with a clubing punch of any sort. The man is not an idiot.

Why would he have to be an idiot to get hit by an all time great slugger? Foreman defeated 76 opponents ( a larger number than Louis ) Were they all idiots? Were Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Michael Moorer, and Ron Lyle all idiots?

[Amsterdam]

Is Lennox Lewis a carticularly complete boxer puncher let us look.

Good jab good mid range ofense OK infighting skills.

How many times have you seen Lewis throw a punch that traveled only twelve inches?

If the answer is not many then he is not among the premier league of infighters.

How well could Lewis feint or parry?

He is a fairly good textbook boxer puncher but lacks finesse and refinment.

You must have missed the entire debate in this thread. Yes, Lewis could feint well, parry, block, had a tight guard, fabulous footwork and his inside skills were decent enough.

His short punches were also good.

Lacks finesse? My oh my.

I think many of the same obsevations aply.

If you say so.

This is the nearest you have come to a valid example. Liston can atleast work the inside outside and mid range with finesse and present a low target coming in but he is much slower and less polished.

I guess because Liston's legacy has more years on it?

I won't dignify that with a response.

I wouldn't expect one from you, or a good rebuttal on anything for that matter.

Nobody is hitting Louis with a clubing punch of any sort. The man is not an idiot.

It'll go right over that lazy jab mate, nothing stopping it either.

He would hold his hand slightly low to draw one of those haymakers, time it and then counter with a combination like he did against Max Baer when he tried exactly the same trick.

He lacked the footwork, defence and timing to not get smacked by Foreman. Baer is not even comparable.

Louis would wan't to back up. He would fight on the back foot and force Forman to walk into his combinations thus increasing their efect. when Louis is on the ropes he will just step inside and then things will get even worse for Foreman.

He can't fight on the backfoot well against agression, look what the pathetic Galento showed for that matter. Foreman is all pressure and all agression. Getting inside with Foreman is going to make things shorter from Louis, even though he'd likely be put out with the smaller gloves from the first big Foreman counter punch.

In a fight between two big punchers the guy coming forward gets his brains scrambled exceptions are few and far between

Not when he's superior from 20 different area's....

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Amsterdam

Louis' is not taking Foreman's flush bombs Janny.

But that is the point he probably would.

Louis was never knocked out by a single punch in his entire career and he fought a lot of huge punchers.

There is no logical reason to beleive that Foreman could do it.

You make it sound as if Louis is the most complete fighter ever technically,

At heavyweight he is. Easily.

it would be odd if Foreman landed yes?

Foreman would land at some point but in order to knock Louis out he would need to land consistently.

To do that he would have to outbox him.

Aint going to happen.

You're judging this whole thing from a historical fans outlook, which is fine,

With respect you must acknowledge that your view point if further from the mainstream than mine.

but you've attributed nothing to the bare bones technical outlook that I have been debating with CT with, because that's not something that you study.

I did not care to read all 60 pages of it but if you want to debate technical details that is fine.

I just find it odd that you confidently confide in your material here as if it's the cemented law.

It is only my opinion.

dont wan't you to think otherwise.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

To be fair,

You're drawing a conclusion based on a single performance of Foreman's. How many performances did Louis have of this description? Let's see, Schmeling I, Galento, Baer, Braddock, Mauriello, Walcott.

Most of these fighters are nothing like Foreman stylisticaly.

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by mr. magoo

To be fair,

You're drawing a conclusion based on a single performance of Foreman's. How many performances did Louis have of this description? Let's see, Schmeling I, Galento, Baer, Braddock, Mauriello, Walcott.

It is a great debate, but I do wonder what is expected of Louis. Okay, Galento gives him some trouble because he can soak up punches and lunges in while in a crouch, and scores a flash knockdown, but Louis pounds him into jelly. Did Frazier do better against the crude Stander?
What about Foreman against Luis Pires, or against Chuvalo when he hurts Chuvalo with a hook, but then Chuvalo stands unmoving against the ropes for about a minute while Foreman misses him again and again and again. Is this great timing. I have never seen Louis miss like that.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by janitor

Most of these fighters are nothing like Foreman stylisticaly.

Is Lyle anything like Louis?

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Amsterdam

You must have missed the entire debate in this thread. Yes, Lewis could feint well, parry, block, had a tight guard, fabulous footwork and his inside skills were decent enough.

Give me some examples.

His short punches were also good.

Again examples. When did he show the ability to throw 12" combos in close like Louis?

Lacks finesse? My oh my.

Not finesse. Versatility.

I guess because Liston's legacy has more years on it?

Put it this way. Liston was a far more complete offensive package than Lewis.

It'll go right over that lazy jab mate, nothing stopping it either.

Every fighter Louis ever faced had a right hand thrown as well as Foremans or better. If Foreman could hit him wiith a looping right hand then anybody could.

He lacked the footwork, defence and timing to not get smacked by Foreman. Baer is not even comparable.

What makes you think that Foreman is any better than Baer technicaly?

He can't fight on the backfoot well against agression, look what the pathetic Galento showed for that matter.

He was a master at it. In the Baer fight he hardly took a forward step while landing most of the punches.

He even made fighters come towards him who didn't want to!

Foreman is all pressure and all agression. Getting inside with Foreman is going to make things shorter from Louis,

Actualy it is prety easy given his lack of infighting skills. Once the exchanges are taking place at 12" Foreman dose not have a prayer.

Not when he's superior from 20 different area's....

Can you name one area where Foreman is superior never mind 20?