Classic : Where does Joe Louis sit with you.

I place Joe at number one. Long reign of sustained excellance. I place a high premium on that criteria. Head to head is mythical and can not be definitively assessed. He Continued to win after long layoff. Dominated return matches like no else. Came through for an entire race of people in winning the title and came through for an entire nation of people in avenging his lone defeat. In spectacular fashion. Dominant. Enduring. Excelled under extreme pressure.

 

Many people would say 4 is too low. However it's all just opinions. Why do you have him ranked there and who are the three fighters you place above him.

 

Top 3 HW.

His legacy is in his dominance. How great he looks on film, an absolute finisher, destroyer. He has a lot of depth to his resume, though imo his era was perhaps a little weak compared to others.

I also tend to think that h2h should be factored in heavily in atg rankings. Some may not agree but Louis would hang with any HW ever and would beat a lot of ATGs.

 

I would like to know someone who doesn't know the difference between "where" and "were".

 

All time ranking of course he sits in the top 3 but head to head IMO people would be surprised at how many fighters would beat him.

 

No 4 because I think Ali,Johnson,Dempsey beat him.

 

Why on earth would you considered him weak head to head? He dominated for a long time, beating all kind of styles, boxers, swarmers, punchers. His resume is stacked with rated fighters, I might be wrong but I think he beat more rated fighters than any heavyweight champ? There is also a fair share of hall of famers and champions on his win list. Was it all by accident?

He lost to three fighters. Three. One he avenged, two was when he was well passed his prime. You could add Walcott if you like, but he knocked him out in the rematch, which is an astonishing feat, the aging champ knocking out his succesor, it is supposed to be the other way around. He beat Godoy on Conn, Conn by knock out, if thats not a clear victory I don't know what is. You mean you have to be up on points the entire fight for the victory to count?

 

1-2 is the general consensus and hard to argue with.

The case for Louis over Ali lies in the fact he was the undisputed king of his era, re-matching and dispatching. Though Ali's best opponents were more fearsome there is an argument that he would have never beaten the Frazier of '71, so you could say he was more the overall winner of his era rather than absolute best.

Joe's style probably aged worse to boot.

 

this wont add much to the thread.....i can't say he was the best, my head just spins when i try to compare champs from different eras....but he was my favourite....joe louis

 

Louis's reign ****es on Marciano's and Dempsey's. Louis was arguably more dominant than Ali, but Ali's competition may have been tougher. Head to head match ups are fun to ponder, but can't be proved either way. Even using this criterion, you can make a decent case for Louis head to head versus anyone.

I voted for him as number one based on his technical ability, longevity and quality of opposition.

 

Louis should rate highly. He's not in my top 3, but I weigh head to head as much as accomplishments. I think too much focus is on his offense, and not enough focus is on his excellent stamina, lack of defense, and slow ability to adapt tactics.

One think that always stuck me as odd is some Joe Louis fans are quick to point out that other heavyweight decades were lacking talent. Yet they won't say the time line Louis fought lacked talent.

IMO the mid 1930's to early 1940's was a weak timeline for heavyweights in general. There was game of musical chairs for the championship until Louis came around.

A few years back Ring Magazine, who really isn't terrible high on modern heavyweights said the USA talent was lower in the 1930's than it is today.

In addition the same group of Louis fans who value title defenses and dominance in their time won't give Wlad his due for having a chance to have as many or more successful title defenses. Louis really did not give some top black fighters title shots either.

I actually think Louis is nearly bullet proof in a historical context, not because he was unbeatable, but because 90% of the fans will always view him as a hero. Hero's are never underrated.