:rofl:rofl:rofl This thread has been ****ing funny to read. It's amazing how knowledgeable some people can be using only boxrec as their knowledge of a fighter!
Louis for me, but may not be the case forever. I don't like comparing resumes with guys still fighting. Wlad is the only bro I believe could make a claim if he continues the way he is. Vitali will never be rated highly based on his resume, nor should he be. H2H I can't see Louis winning easily. Current Wlad is no joke. Damn near unbeatable. Can't beat him on points. Cant beat him on the outside. Can't get inside to work (Wlads grappling is a serious offensive and defensive weapon) and walking him down won't work either. He'll just keep tying you up. Vitali is a problem because being in range to throw against him means you are already well in range of his jab, right and most important that wierd angle hookercut arm punch of his. Which helps to negate side to side movement and if you get caught by it while moving you are ****ed (just ask Solis). Having said that Vitali would take a lot more damage. He doesn't move out of range as fast or as often as little bro. Nor does he have those lethal tie up skills. Vitali would get his body worked hard. Louis UD Current Vitali 2001ish Vitali UD or KO Louis Louis KO young Wlad Current Wlad KO Louis I'd also like to add that not enough weight is given to the unique time period that Joe dominated in. At no point in history have more of our young males been unavailable to compete. Dominating during the greatest war we have ever seen and directly afterwards shouldn't carry much weight. Think of all the boxers coming up at the time who enlisted. What about already established boxers who enlisted. Even after the war finished you had no talent having been developed. Whatever capable boxing genetics that were out there either weren't developed or died in battle. Weakest gene pool in our history
Agreed with this. If they want to say the Klitschkos could beat Louis and analyse why then that's fine. Talk about boxing a bit. Whereas what they are actually doing is comparing numbers. 'Louis beat a guy that weight this much and had this record blahblahblah and is sooooo overrated because the guy he beat weighed....' With absolutely no grasp on his skills or any relevant information! Do these people actually think they're discussing boxing here? I think they should join an accounting forum or something. Boxing is clearly not their thing but they ****ing love numbers.
Actually you guys love posting numbers better than anyone when it goes your way. But it almost never does.:yep
This is an interesting theory. I wonder if there is anything to back it up? It does makes sense...but sometimes things are not as obvious as they seem. Louis himself fought only once during WWII. And previous to the war, during the Depression, it is likely that there may have been the MOST boxers of any point in US history...
Louis would be seen as a glass-chinned champion by today's boxing fans. He'd basically be the black/brown Wlad. .
Interesting! What about the massive economic growth after the war? Could that have made boxing weaker because young men had more opportunity outside the sport with lots of high paying jobs available?
Who's 'you guys'? I've already said I'd have no problem with you claiming the Klitschkos could beat Louis. My only problem is the only thing you're using to back up that statement is boxrec. If you'd analysed how the fights would go and show something that would make me believe you've ever sat down and watched Louis then this thread would be grand. As it is it's a shitheap of 'Klits are bigger' 'this guy had 4 losses' 'KO percentage' In summary, it's just fanboy bull****.
This. It's ridiculous to claim he's so overated when you look at his achievements and immense skills. You can certainly make a case that the Klits could beat him (not that I'm saying they would (or wouldn't)) but to act like he was some kind of bum is a joke.