Should Louis have fought more than two black men in his 26 title defenses?

That's about the size of it.:good

 

I think to some extent it does matter. An 18 fight winning streak which included a few of Louis' title challengers should have drawn attention, for some it did. If these men were good enough for Louis they should have been good enough for Franklin. Losing to Lem certainly didn't prove to be an obstacle in Simon getting a title shot. Of course we've already come to terms on the point that Simon's shot was political but once again, if the argument is about who was more deserving, then its basically a no brainer.

 

Agreed.... That's a pretty poor record... But you can't play both sides of the fence using this logic. Simon only winning 2 of his last 6 doesn't seem to stop you from supporting his getting a rematch with Louis over Franklin. And now ( with all due respect ) you're pointing out the recent misfortunes and track records of men that someone else suggested were worthy challengers.. I personally don't think that Jack Trammel was in line, but just pointing out the contradiction here.

 

Might be the case, but it sounds more like a tap dance to me. I think in all likelihood he was hoping for Franklin to lose someone who Louis had either already beaten or who's style was more palatable to the champ, but that's just as speculative on my part as you or anyone else claiming that Jacobs was "prepping" Franklin to be a more marketable challenger.

I'm not sure that he was protecting him either. Again, I don't know. my only argument from the very beginning was that he was more deserving than many of the challengers that Louis DID fight.

 

I happen to think that winning 50 strait fights with 44 of them via stoppage in just a four year period was pretty impressive regardless of how poor his opposition might have been. That's a lot of activity and consistency.. Ad to that a victory over one of the top 3 best contenders in the world and a few wins over some guys who were respectable journeyman and fringe types, and again it ads up to a lot more than what a fair number of other named fighters were doing. Tony Musto, Gus Dorazio, Al Mcoy, Jack Roper, Abe Simon, and a fair number of others got title shots doing comparable or dare I say less. A rubber match with Walcott wasn't unfair as you say, and I have no problem with Walcott getting the shot. But giving Ray a crack at it, following Walcott despite losing that rubber match, or even just giving him one in the first place wouldn't have destroyed his legacy either. Ring Magazine obviously has a positive opinion of Ray as they have him ranked as one of their top 30 or 40 all time best punchers.

 

I'm not supporting Simon getting a rematch,I'm explaining one, so there is no contradiction.
And some one else was talking out of his rectum.

 

The Ring isn't ,and never has been responsible for title fight matchmaking.

Bottom line

DID LOUIS EVER DUCK HIS NUMBER ONE CHALLENGER?

 

Making constant references to Franklin's defeat to Pastor isn't explaining much. Its only using hindsight as a convenient crutch.. There are other reasons why Franklin didn't get the shot initially, but his loss to Pastor shouldn't be listed among them..

Tends to be problematic.

 

I've asked before what several of these guys did to merit a title shot but no one has replied.

 

Relax old chum.. My reference to Ring rating him as one of its top punchers of all time was more of a sidenote and it hardly represents the body of my post.

well he fought plenty of #9's and #10's, when it wouldn't have killed him to take on more of his #2's and #3's.

 

Not at all when you include retired boxers , those well past prime .,and those with 5 wins out of their last 20 fights ,that is just sewage posting.. Franklin had a window of about 24 days to challenge for the crown its hardly worth anyone taking up cudgels on his behalf.

 

I'll take that as a resounding NO!!

 

Irrelevant... Jacobs could have just as easily signed Louis to fight Franklin five months after dusting Simon instead of Simon in that same time frame. Common sense should make this painfully clear. Had Wladimir Klitscko signed to fight Andrjei Wawrzyk five months after he lost to Povetkin, instead of Povetkin himself, you'd be all over his **** about it...

 

And Jacobs arranging further matches for his number one's and benefiting from their losing those matches was crafty management for sure. But have it your way. Louis did not ALWAYS fight the best available talent, contrary to what so many have tried to build a house of cards in an effort to substantiate.