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

Elmer Ray and Lem Franklin are the only ones who had a real case though. And Ray probably the only one with a "strong" case. Franklin should have been selected over Simon but his window of chance was short lived. The rest of the African American fighters who were around didn't seem to stay on a winning streak for any significant period of time, were ranked lower than some of their white contemporaries or simply had no market value or weren't that good..

 

Yes Jimmy Bivins had an outstanding run from 1942-1946, which was likely the best of his career. He indeed defeated the men you listed plus a few other notables, Archie Moore being among them. The problem is that this steak took place during the years Louis was in service and not defending actively, which was probably one of the reasons why that fight never came off ( or not until it no longer mattered. ) I imagine a lot of good bouts never materialized in every division due to the disruption of the war. As for Franklin's 18 fight winning streak, I haven't checked every man's record leading into their bouts with Louis, but winning 18 strait including a few over named opposition was certainly rare in those days.

 

I agree, but for reasons that have been uncovered after much good and well argued debate in this thread, it wasn't that simple.

 

The underlined is grossly overstating the case.
Three months before he challenged Louis ,Lewis defended his lhvy title against Al Gainer who had beaten Tiger Jack Fox.
Eight months before Lewis had Ko'd Elmer Ray.

This was the reason for the gate!
Far form avoiding black fighters Louis insisted on fighting Lewis .
It was Mike Jacobs who was reluctant to put on two blacks in a title fight, just as Barney Curley, Jim Coffroth
and Tex Rickaard had been 3 decades earlier.
But your internet history shows you have never been reluctant to libel black fighters.
There is something deeply unpleasant about you spewing out the cant that Louis put back black people's advancement and discriminated against them in title defences.
It was Louis who smashed the ceiling of blacks being barred a heavyweight title shot due to the miasma of the fallout from people like you and their reaction to Johnson's title reign.
It was Louis who was responsible for the desegration of troops when he gave exhibitions.

It was Louis who was responsible for 17 blacks going to Officer Candidate School, one of whom, the great baseball player Jackie Robinson became a Lieutenant.

It was Louis who defended his title twice for just training expenses donating his purses to the war effort.

It was Louis who gave away over $ 10,000 worth of tickets to black soldiers to see his defences.
It was Louis who promoted and paid for a black baseball team to tour the US.
it was Louis who broke down the colour bar in 2 exclusively white golf clubs.
It was Louis who gave nearly 100 exhibitions to further the war effort and sell War Bonds.
It was Louis who by his conduct during the war forced bigots like you to take another look at their black American neighbours and give them some respect.
No black man did more for the advancement of his people in general and in sports in particular.


I find your stance on this, like yourself, rather loathsome .

 

Louis purposely avoided no one. The advent of WW2 quashed the potential of many additional title defenses Louis would have had. Certainly Bivins would have had his shot and he was head and shoulders the best during that time. Bivins would have been koed by the Louis of 41-45.

 

In fairness to Joe Louis, he was 36 years old, had been retired for two and a half years, and was a career high 218 lbs when he met Charles.. He met Joe Walcott after a fifteen month layoff and only having fought maybe three times in five years. Both men went on to being hall of fame inductees. I don't think these bouts should be any knock on Louis.. As for the rest of the crew, a great deal of bouts between Louis and various African American fighters simply could not be made for a myriad of reasons. Elmer Ray is about the only one that absolutely should have happened.. He was ranked in the top 10 for 4 strait years, locked in at #2 for two strait years, and I believe was briefly #1 if only for a few months.. A 50 fight win streak including wins over Walcott and Savold should have sealed his claim to a shot. But other than that, there really isn't much of an argument for anyone else.. A lot of black contenders rose briefly during the war years when Louis's title reign was for the most part dormant due to his service.. There were others who's tenure as contenders were too short lived or beaten by men who Louis eventually DID fight. Franklin was a good candidate and in my opinion should have gotten a title fight before having to face Bob Pastor, but it is what is.. He fought Pastor and lost, and from there fell off the face of the earth..

 

it was definitley louis's fault and his decision, nothing to do with his manager making fights for him. in fact it is well known jacob's was thoroughly frustrated that louis wouldn't agree to fight all the big money matches he had arranged with other black fighters.

 

I'll say again. Franklin's manager didnt want the Louis fight. You cant drag him kicking and screaming into it. Its hilarious how this is being ignored.

 

A manager who didn't want his man fighting for the world title? Is there I source I should be reading?

 

Yes very shortly a two volume magnum opus on Jack Hurley will be released by the world's foremost authority on him and one of the greatest boxing historians alive. Hurley is the same manager who famously walked out on a mandated (and much easier) LHW title shot for his fighter Harry Matthews, opting instead to face Marciano in a non title bout. You guys just cant seem to wrap your heads around the fact that timing is extremely important in those sport and vital to understanding why Louis missed out on some fights that he did. The combination of some of the fighters you guys act like he ducked only being rated highly for a very short period of time, the war years, and previously booked bouts conflicting with potential matchups makes your argument ridiculously weak and revisionist. Lem Franklin was rated highly for a very short period and ultimately lost his standing to a guy Louis had beaten twice (and who, incidently, would have made a much better matchup for Louis based on their previous two outings and his learned experience against the Bomber). Rays record is so ridiculously padded that if he were white we wouldnt even be having this dicussion. He was a total nobody until Louis was on the shelf for the duration of the war. ***** and moan all you want but the Conn fight was going to happen. Period. It was THE fight everyone wanted. It was too big not to happen so it was obvious that was going to be the fight that Louis and Conn took first upon exiting the military. Ray didnt even really establish himself until after that and did so only by squeeking by Walcott. Say what you want but Mauriello had fought a hell of a lot more marquee fights and fighters than Ray ever dreamed and he deserved that shot a lot more than Ray did off of beating Lee Savold and Walcott. Had Ray beaten Walcott in the rematch he would have gotten the shot. Instead it was Walcott and Louis fought him in his very next fight. Frankly Walcott wasnt even considered that much of a threat to Louis based on his age and numerous losses. BUT he was a lot more well known than Ray and had fought more name fighters as well. He was a much more proven quantity. Neither one of them was considered a threat, great fighter, or even a draw (Mauriello and Louis drew more than twice as many as Louis-Walcott 1, Louis-Conn 2 almost tripled it). Its only this bizarre revisionism that has Louis somehow ducking Ray for taking three fights that made much more sense. I wont even get into Bivins. He didnt have a look in. Ive said until Im blue in the face that he got a shot Louis into the ring with him and ran and spoiled all night long. You think hes suddenly going to grow a pair of ***** with the mankiller in front of him? Hardly. Nobody would have even heard of these guys if the guy with the little mustache over in Germany hadnt come along. As it stands one was named "the duration champion" (whatever the hell that means), one is now being tossed around like he was a young Mike Tyson, wading through the division with ease, and the other had nine championship bouts and managed to win 2 (one of which was highly disputed). Somehow these guys are being so blown up that one of the greatest champions in history ducked them. LOL.:-patsch:roll:

 

None of this ranting answers my question and its basically a rehash of everything that's been argued back and forth here for days.. I will however keep this opus of Jack Hurley in mind when it comes out... Thanks for the future source whenever it becomes available.