How bad was Joe Louis's opposition ?

You could probably build up a case for Louis having ducked a number of the white contenders of the era, but nobody seems to bother.

 

I think that's about the size of it J.

 

I'm 36, almost 37.

Anyway, who here did see Louis fight live (in person or on TV does not matter)? If you did, how old where you? His reign ended in 1949 after he retired as champ. His last title defense was the rematch vs. Jersey Joe Walcott in 1948 (some may count the 1950 fight vs. Charles as an attempted defense of the Lineal HW title though). Anyway, let's say you were 10 years old in 1948...

first of all... what does a 10 year old know?

second... that makes you 73 now... you might still have your mind

Let's say you were 20... that makes you 83 now... :tired

My point? You might be a senile old fvck! :yep

Seriously though, just because somebody actually seen a fight live... and I had to watch a recording... doesn't mean a damn thing!

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Do you have any theory as to why Louis might have regarded Lem Franklin, Turkey Tomphson and other black challengers' as a greater threat to his position as champion than Max Schmmeling or Joe Walcott?

 

Pretty ****ing terrible...


P.S. Sorry.. Just had a few drinks after work....

 

I think Schmeling was pretty obvious.. He had a score to settle there.

 

Perhaps you are missing the point and he was realy avoiding talented white contenders such as Melio Bettina, Gunnar Barlund, Pat Comiskey and Joe Baksi.

Perhaps he wanted no part of a rematch with Max Baer.

Some of these would be much more plausible than him being afraid of Lem Franklin, but it dosn't fit the pattern that people are scanning for.

 

I don't nor have ever accused Louis of ducking fighters white or black during his EARLY title reign.... The best guys who were around at that time, he actually fought and beat emphatically... And it made perfect sense for him to fight them.. This time frame ranged from about 1937 to maybe 1942.... From 1943 to 1946 however, there were some better guys out there, but he still deserves credit for beating the contenders that he dispatched. Elmer Ray was an important match in my eyes though... He compiled a 50 fight streak which included wins over Walcott and Savold.. The rematch between Walcott and Ray was forced in my opinion, and suited for Louis's benefit rather than Ray's or Walcott....

 

Mendoza

It does seem to me your argument is somewhat like saying that because the opponents of the Pittsburg Steelers of the 1970's probably couldn't get to the playoffs in the modern NFL (and I think they couldn't), the Steelers in the 1970's were not a great team. I guess the issue is whether anyone can be great outside of their own time.

*Sorry to non-Americans for use of an American analogy.

 

Franklin had a good 1941 he beat
Simon
Simms
Sheppard
Musto
Bivins
But in
42,he lost to Pastor by ko
43 Savold by ko
and dropped a dec to Dorazio.
In 41 Louis defended 7 times
Burman who had been no 3 in 40
Dorazio who was unranked but would make no 5 in 43
Simon no 4
B Baer no 6
Conn not ranked until the next year when he would be no1
Nova no 8

Can we really castigate Louis for defending against these challengers?

Turkey Thompson.
I think it is easier to say Thompson's claims to a title challenge are a lot more tenuous than Franklin's.
In 1940 he lost twice to Pastor
41 he drew with Musto , and Simon.
42 he beat Valentino,but also lost to him.
43 he kod Ray in 1 rd, huge win.
44 lost to Murray .
In 1940 Louis fought Godoy twice,Godoy was no2.
1941 Louis stopped Musto and Simon, both drew with Thompson that year, Louis did not get around to Valentino until 49 when Joe was definitely on the slide , he stopped Valentino in 8rds in an exhibition.
I don't really see a strong case for either Franklin or Thompson .
Had Louis defended against them it would not have been illogical ,but because he did not is definitely not surprising, or indefensible,imo.

 

No, it's a FACT that Ray's manager said THIS to the Florida press in January of 1947:

"He [Ray] must, in fact, take on two or three stiff fights if he's going to tackle Louis. You can't get in fighting shape boxing bums and knocking 'em out in the first round or so. Before we get into the ring with Louis, Elmer definitely will have a couple of hard bouts under his belt." - Tommy O'Loughlin, Ray's manager.

It's a FACT that Ray's people then CHOSE to rematch Walcott as part of their "two of three stiff fights" to prepare for Louis, but lost.


It's also a FACT that Ray was broken down and stopped by a guy that YOU just dismissed as "old and sick." So according to YOU, it was wrong for Louis to fight an "old and sick" fighter, but he should've fought a guy who was less than an "old and sick" fighter instead?? nut

Which is consistent with the fact that white contenders far outnumbered black contenders through most of Louis' reign.

If Louis had selectively bypassed white contenders for black ones just to satisfy some sort of bullsh!t "quota" in your mind, then that would be blatantly racist.

And what skills do you see in Ray, Thompson, or Franklin?

You're right, there's no place in the modern HW era today for a 5'9" fat man.

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Once again, Ray's people expressly stated on record that they DID NOT WANT an immediate shot at Louis, because their man needed time to recover from a "shoulder injury" and then have "two or three stiff fights" first to get ready. I don't understand why people just keep assuming it was "Louis' fault" this fight didn't happen, without looking into the facts first.

Also, this was a contemporary view of Ray's winning streak you keep pointing to, heading into Ray's first fight with Walcott:

"Violent Elmer boasts 47 straight victories, including 42 knockouts, but most of his victims were hand-picked palookas. The only opponents who approached prominence were Lee Savold, George Fitch, Larry Lane, Earl Lowman, and Vern Escoe. And all of them were far past their peaks." - The Windsor Daily Star, November 15, 1946.

 

Your numbers are off here.

Conn and Nova were the #1 and 2 contenders at the time Louis fought them in mid or late '41. Franklin was rated below both of them at the time.

Franklin only moved toward the top of the rankings, basically by default, after Louis beat both of those guys. There was only a very brief window of a few months that you could argue Franklin deserved a title shot, before he was basically exposed by Pastor and then went quickly downhill.