As it stands, some have him as the GOAT in HW boxing and most everyone else has him at #2. Had he stayed retired with one (avenged) defeat, would a clear majority have him at # 1 ?
It's not the actual comeback that damages his legacy, it was peoples perception of it. Today, it's a normal sight to see a modern fighter box until he's too old and gets KO'd. With Louis it was a new phenomenon to many people. And I think it shocked a lot of people to see Louis KO'd, and it stuck in many peoples minds. On one hand his comeback elevates his greatness in my eyes. On the other, I can't help but think I might perceive him better if he retired after KOing Walcott.
Louis came back because he was screwed by the IRS. This in no way damages his legacy as an ATG at the highest level.
No need to explain, BE. I am sufficiently familiar with your typing style (with or without a SPACEBAR) that I knew exactly what you meant to say.
Yes. Losses don't help anyone. A loss by knockout certainly doesn't. Joe's comeback didn't include any wins that enhanced his legacy. Losing to Charles and Marciano didn't elevate him in any way.
Louis picked up good wins in his comeback in Savold, Brion, and Bivins. The loses to Charles and Marciano have rarely been used to discredit him. Very respectable losses for an aging great.
I'm very much a proponent of judging fighter on their prime performances. Fighters should not be rewarded simply because they know when to retire nor conversely be punished for not knowing when to hang it up.
I disagree. Cesar Brion was a nobody. Bivins had already been beaten 20 times. He was nothing after the war. They didn't make up for the losses to Charles and Marciano. If Louis had retired at 58-1 as undisputed heavyweight champion ... and remained retired ... having beaten everyone he'd ever faced ... he'd have been viewed differently. Nobody would've picked Charles or Marciano to beat a prime Louis in mythical matchups. (There'd be no images of an old, balding Louis getting hammered by both.) The losses hurt his legacy. No question. The comeback did nothing to improve upon retiring as undisputed champ at 58-1.
So what? Most people still wouldnt pick charles or rocky to beat him prime for prime. Even at that late stage he was still able to beat the vadt majority of hevyweights in the world with little more than his jab. Peopke today just focus too much on win vs loss ratio which is pointless and largely a byproduct of todays overprotected fighters. Its not like hes roy jones who never fought anyone in his prime and then starts getting knocked out by every cab driver with a pair of boxibg gloves. Louis was outpointed by a prime hofer and ****ed that guys face up in the process and stopped by another prime hofer and ****ed that guys face up also. For a guy who was old and fighting just for the payday ill take that while hes beating legitimate contenders. To me its unfortunate louis had to do that but mire fighters than not do as well and louis performed better than most. It certainly doesnt diminish the towering titan he was in his prime.
So where does he sit on your top HW list, Klompton, assuming you engage in such speculative pastimes ?