Does anyone not rate Joe Louis in there top 2 heavyweights of all time list?

Best for best? I have no doubt they could all beat the same version as Marciano, but...

 

I think there was a big difference in finishing ability of Schmeling compared to Shavers and Snipes after that Louis went down against Walcott,Buddy Baer, staggered vs Tami M. and Louis got up to KO most of the guys that hurt him. He fought big punchers like Max Baer, etc. and did great. Dempsey did not fight close to his level of opponents and Holmes avoided the heavier handed opponents of his era like Coetzee,Improved Weaver not the 18-9 guy that surprised him) Page had a sneaky right hand, Thomas had a jab like a right cross

Shavers dropped Lyle,Hurt Stander,rocked Cobb, dropped Mercado,stunned Quarry, only to be KO'd so he was pretty much known as a guy who quickly winded and ran out of steam and was not a finisher and Snipes had no credentials as a finisher or big puncher

Dempsey got dropped by the Wild bull while prime and was lucky to get back into the fight and Gene Tunney dropped him so while I am a big fan of Jack's he ranks much lower than Louis for actual proof of chin or recuperative ability

I seen Holmes get battered by Bobick and he was Ko'd 2x by Nick Wells in the amateurs and even though he improved greatly and was always in condition, the KO loss to Tyson kind of confirmed my doubts that he could have survived a lot of the guys he avoided for stylistic reasons

I think overall and in every aspect Joe Louis is a madatory top 1 or 2 or at the very least 3 in everyone's ratings ATG to be taken serious

by the way what southpaw did Louis avoid

 

Don't get me started on Marciano IB!

 

...go!

 

I think Joe Louis was a very great fighter , let's get that out of the way first of all. I have him at no 4 because I think Johnson, Ali and Dempsey beat him. Louis is probably the most complete heavyweight I have seen,and he was still champ when I was born .
I just think Dempsey overwhelms him early. Louis's title challengers were pretty ordinary, he himself said Conn was his best challenger, well he didn't set the world alight at heavyweight.

Many of Dempsey's early opponents haven't been seen by anyone now alive, I would be very wary of making sweeping statements as to their comparative quality. If you don't take me seriously because Louis is my no 4 that is your prerogative,I'm only a fan not a historian.

Eddie Futch named 3 men as the best Johnson,Ali and Louis, and he declined to put them in any order. [Futch sparred regularly with Louis ,seconded opponents against Ali ,and saw several of Johnson's fights.] I have Louis just one number down from that, so maybe that isn't too outrageous?

Louis avoided no fighter , but his management vetoed Melio Bettina because they said no one looks good against a southpaw.I just mentioned it because you said he met all sizes and styles ,and he didn't.ok?

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

People rank fighters according to their own lights.

 

If you rank fighters based on who you think would win head to head, it is basically guesswork, and then the person to your left will reach a different conclusion.

If you rank fighters based on resume, then you are working with historical facts. There is still some interpretation involved, but there are still tangible measures that you can get a handle on. We would be on very safe ground saying that Joe Louis beat more world class fighters than Jack Dempsey, for example.

 

fair enough on your opinion of Louis's rating but do you really think the 5'9 170lb Bettina had a chance against Louis just because he was a southpaw, Melio was Ko'd in 1 round by Gus Lesnevich, Melio could have swung a baseball bat from his southpaw stance and Joe Louis would have KHTFO

 

Name me a major sportswriter who had seen both Dempsey and Louis in the flesh who picked Louis up until the late 1960's Dempsey was seen as the winner.The biggest flaw on rating on resume is that the fighter you are comparing your nominee to has rarely faced the same opposition and if he has they would have been in different stages of ascendancy and decline in their careers,therefore there is a great deal of interpretation involved .

An example for H to H is the Frazier v Tyson thread.
Tyson was quicker, bigger, hit harder ,was a two fisted banger as opposed to a one armed one,had better defence ,a better chin,and a greater variety of punches .
Therefore I feel fairly confident in picking him H to H over Frazier, not certain , but fairly confident. That seems as valid a rationale to me,as trying to determine how Tyson would have done against 1971 Ali? Or how Frazier would have weathered Ruddock's left smash?

 

I give Bettina next to zero chance aginst Louis, but that isn't the point.
I was just correcting your statement that Louis faced all styles.

 

He faced all styles that were eligible and marketable, I don't think anyone considered Melio Bettina a threat and even though Jake Lamotta wanted to fight Louis I don't think either were marketable as anything less than MURDER

 

You are now qualifying your original statement.
ps According to Louis he never even met a rightie in the amateurs.
.

 

who was the qualified Leftie that he avoided in your opinion?

there were not many around back then.

I dont think Tony Thompson was fighting back then. Joe Frazier and Gerry Cooney were both southpaws but they turned them around

Who did Joe avoid?

 

I've already said Louis ducked no one.

MIke Jacobs refused to make a couple of all black matches when Joe was champ,purely on financial grounds. The only colour Jacobs could see was green. Louis wasn't convinced ,he had wanted to fight John Henry Lewis much earlier than he did but went along with the program. Jack Roper sometimes switch hit but he didn't against Louis,dont think he had time.