Joe Louis Vs. Wladimir Klitschko

Actually it DOES matter. It matters a ton. If Sanders could not beat any 'name' fighter in his era besides Wlad, then despite you pumping him up to be this monster, the facts speak volumes. He never beat a name heavyweight close to his prime besides Wlad.

You assert that Ali fought bums and cruisers? Whatever you say, they were world ranked and Ali beat them all over two decades.

It is Sanders who beat bums and cruisers. That is the sum total of Sanders' career. That is the truth. Look at the names, their rankings and so on. They were on the lower end of the scale in his era. Bobby Czyz (one of his biggest wins) was a former light-heavyweight on the slide and Bert Cooper was a drug-addled former cruiserweight who was also finished at that point. This is another 'big win' for Sanders.
Old cruiserweights and journeymen took this superman the distance many times.

Sanders does have some nice qualities and better managed he could have done more. But at the end of the day, he could not really make a dent in his era, besides that one big win over Wlad. He may look good on film, but the facts speak for themselves. He did not make big waves when he was active, and if he were truly all that, he would have.

 

Do you also need it more specific why the leading tennis player of today would wipe the floor with the leading tennis player of 1930? Rafael Nadal is light years better in about every department: strength, athleticism, speed, reflexes, stamina, strategy. Just like a 2013 Wlad Klitschko is light years better than Joe Louis and his peers in all the same departments.

Wlad Klitschko will look equally overmatched when compared to the 2100 HW champion. Wlad, Lewis and Bowe will look primitive, slow and with little chance to win against future champions.

 

So...nothing? You're waffling now. Show me where Louis was so primitive.

 

Yeah, I feel totally schooled.

He said that Louis was primitive. If primitive means smaller than Wlad then okay, but size is a physical attribute, not a skill. What in his technique was primitive?

 

So Rahman could eat Sanders shots over and over but Ali gets ko'd early buy the small few Sanders is luckly enough to catch him with?
Milinburger was a southpaw with better defence and stamina than Sanders. Ali boxed him to pieces and stopped him.
I'm not tyring to convince you here, im just making you look stupid.

 

Except boxing is the one sport that has regressed in talent especially in the HW division.
You keep making pointles comparsons to other non combat sports because you can't back up anything you say.
No man with half a brain would compare running track to boxing and claim what applies to one applies to both.

 

Oh dear.

atsch

 

Right, boxing is the ONLY sport in the world that regressed. 999 sports progressed radically, just boxing stagnated :hi:

This is so dumb I don't know where to start.

 

I know. You never backed up your claim and you never will because you can't.

You're comparing combat sports to atletics. This where to start to get confused.

Why is Louis the 1st or 2nd greatest HW of all time and not Wladimir Klitschko or Lennox Lewis?
Why isn't there another Bruce Lee with all these 'modern advances'?

Being fitter does not make you more skilled. You might want to look up George Best.
One of the greatest footballers who ever lived and he used play drunk.

Skills and technique motherfuker. Do you understand it? Obviously not.

 

I feel the same way after reading the posts by you and your 'friend elroy' and 'the others'. You keep comparing the 999 sports where records are broken by running/swimming faster, jumping higher...etc. With Boxing we are talking about a skill here, it truly is an art.

Unfortunately with the demise of neighborhood gyms, and small arenas the 'Art of Boxing' is not as good across the board, as it once was. We don't even have the quality of trainers, who can teach these skills/tricks anymore.

Yes they're are many good/great modern fighters. But to suggest because a fighter fought in the 20's, 50's or 70's that they couldn't compete today is completely ignorant on your part.

Look at Golf or Baseball for instance. Some of the greatest Golfers or Baseball players were from days past. While the equipment has changed the skills required to hit or throw a ball are the same.

Todays baseball players in fact had to cheat 'Roids' to break oldtime homerun records. So while the players are bigger/stronger 'Roids in many cases' the skill required to hit or catch or throw the ball are the same. I would imagine oldtime players wouldn't require the coddling a superstar does today. The work ethic for the most part was much better in days past.

The 'ancient and primitive' players in the Baseball HOF would be starters for teams today, simply because of the skills they had, would be as good or greater then they're teammates they were competing against.

You and your 'friends' come across as really thick headed slick. Are you really that desperate for attention, that you need to troll a boxing website? You have done nothing for the most part, but make 'yourselves' look like complete FOOLS and TOOLS. Get away from the computer, come out of moms basement, and go outside and make friends, or go talk to some ladies. You need to get laid.

 

Go onto a football forum and claim Pele, Bobby Charlton, George Best , Diego Maradona were 'primitive' and 'unskilled' :nut

 

Do you remember that clown last year, who said that Maradona wouldn't be able to play in today's game? atsch

I don't know where these thoughts come from.

 

Owned! :good

 

He can't put forward an argument without comparing track and field records etc.

atsch

 

Boxing has progressed from the M.O.Q. but it doesn't progress every decade, like other sports have.

Look at today's top fighters, and then compare them to the top fighters of the 90's.

There's no comparison.