Joe Louis Vs. Wladimir Klitschko

I don't know of any football fan who would have the audacity and disrespect to call old time greats 'primitive and unskilled'

Muscular guys like Wlad attract a lot of body building weirdos to this sport.

 

Stallone and Fitty might not beat Louis but they could beat most of his opponents.

 

I question the validity of posters that claim they're these great boxing fans, yet at every point, put down some of the greatest fighters ever. And they all seem to be black.

I would admit to having Wlad in my top 20 Heavyweight list. But I also think that his weak jaw leaves him vulnerable, to past greats. I think most believe the same. Where they have him ranked may differ.

In time I can also see Wlad receiving greater credit for his career and moving up on these theoretical ATG lists. But then I see the devastating KO losses on his record against the likes of Puritty/Sanders/Brewster and his current safety first style, and think well maybe not.

These 'awesome boxing fans' all seem to have this strange fetish with muscles and size. I imagine these are the types of guys who during physical education classes, were caught gazing at others schlongs and fantasizing.

 

I guess I've heard it all now!

 

I have watched it. You want me to be impressed because he managed to evade Valuev's slow punches, Valuev the slowest Heavyweight champion of alltime. I guess it takes me a little more to fawn over a fighter.

I could care less what 'White Tyson' did in the amateurs. He was an ok fighter, not a ATG to be sure.

 

I guess we just happen to think differently what 'outstanding' is.

 

Calling Chagg who was

This content is protected

than Louis a 'master' and claiming Louis could not not compete in today's era..atsch

Chagaev was ****. He followed Wlads fists around the ring head first because he had basic skills and no ring IQ.
He was also medically unfit to box and HBO rejected to air the fight.

ydksab.

 

I still don't really understand your argument though. You say that Louis was allowed to display his full arsenal against the fighters of his era because they were CW's and Light-heavyweights?

But what I'm saying is that we often don't see these skills in today's era, even when the fighters of today are facing tomato cans or actual CW's themselves. (CW's who put on a few pounds to fight at heavyweight.)

Louis, regardless if he was facing a small fighter like Conn or a big guy like Buddy Baer, showed the same skills in every fight. Whatever the style, whatever the size or skill of the fighter, Louis displayed the same skills he always did.

Yes, one can find isolated instances where fighters today show the skills Louis did, but do you think that as a rule they show the same well-roundedness as Louis, regardless of quality of the competition, regardless of size of the fighter?
Honestly, I'm not seeing it. Wlad to a point yes, but what about the rest of the division?

It's also worth noting that Louis often looked better against the bigger guys because they tended to stand in front of him more and give him those opportunities to get his punches off. Joe's entire style was built with the purpose of being able to unleash two-fisted volleys at all times, hence the shuffle he often adopted.

The smaller guys like Conn would dart away before Joe could let rip. Traditionally, the small, nimble movers like Farr and Conn gave him the most trouble. The bigger guys often fared much worse.

I don't think the 'he fought CWs' argument applies to Louis as much as it does to a lot of the other old-time fighters. Against the bigger guys, boxers not so adept at keeping away from him, he often looked sensational.

 

I can't see why good posters are still wasting their time on these (this?) imbicile...

Maybe I'm too impatient, but there's a point when you have to say "I can't talk to this dummy anymore"...

 

It would be like watch Wlad vs Adonis Stevenson

 

Wow..... :shock:

 

That guy Tammy? Joes opponent :-( how is that guy his 23rd defense?

 

The ironic thing is you're telling us beating Valuev (a guy with zero boxing fundamentals who belongs in a circus not in a boxing ring) is nothing special. But we're supposed to be impressed how Louis beat Carnera (a guy with zero boxing fundamentals who actually did work in circus as a strongman)?:deal

Why the double standards? :think

 

Exactly. People think by saying Louis would be destroyed by modern day HWs we're somehow taking away something from Louis. That's not a criticism of Louis; he was as good and great as his time and era allowed him to be. He couldn't be any better given the circumstances.

Denying Louis any chances against modern day HWs is not 'pissing on classic era boxers' as some put it; it's just stating a fact that sports evolve and athletes get better decade by decade. Louis was the greatest of his era, beat everyone who was put in front of him.

Where I draw the line is when people say that beating the classic era competition of his time (e.g. Baer, Carnera and Galento) are actually used as indications of how Louis would do against modern day SHWs :rofl. That's just ridiculous as the opponents Louis beat woulnd't even be top 25 HWs today. Just look at the video footage of Louis' era and see how primitive the fighting game was back then. It's downright comical by modern standards.

 

Shut up ******.

Louis was 6'2. Chagg was 5'11.

Chagaev was 20 pounds fatter. Only to a clown like you , would that make him better than Joe Louis.