Aleksandr Povetkin in the 30s

Huck would have been considered one of the bigger heavyweights in the 30s, bigger than Louis, Schmeling, Braddock, Sharkey and around the same size as Max Baer. I don't think Povetkin's being unable to stop him in the 2000s really has much of a negative impact on his ability to outmuscle the even smaller guys around back then.

Wlad beat Povetkin by draping himself all over him in a sickening display of non-combat that would have seen Carnera get disqualified if he attempted the same. Even so, despite the one-sided nature of the scorecards, it was clear Povetkin was giving Wlad some serious concerns at times whenever he made his way onto the inside.

I think Carnera gives Povetkin a few issues due to his size, but I can't see him beating him at any stage.

 

Louis was the same size as Huck if not a little bigger. What I mean is Huck routinely makes cruiserweight whereas when Louis went down to sub 200 for Conn he was drained to crap. Also, Schmeling, Sharkey and Louis were leagues above Huck in every way.

 

Povetkin was barely able to beat Huck, nevermind stop him.

 

Louis was barely able to beat Conn. Had it been a 12 round fight, he would have lost the championship to a guy who weighed less than 170 pounds.

My point being... Everyone has a bad night. It's best to look at main body of work rather than aberrant performances.

 

Were either of these aberrant performances though?

I am not certain that they were.

 

When was Louis stung by a speedy underpowered, undersized guy like that before? Sure, some boxer types were able to survive but I certainly remember swing for fence types like Galento and Mauriello giving him more scares than Farr or Pastor.

If reports are to believed, Sasha wasn't exactly Spartan in training for Huck. And perhaps that was the same scenario for Louis against Conn. I can't recall reading much about his preparation.

Sh*t happens in fights, especially at heavyweight. If an elite fighter takes his foot off the gas, even a bit, he can be in for a rough night against someone not of his caliber but who is hungry and motivated. We've seen this scenario innumerable times.

 

Louis went to his grave insisting that Conn was the best he ever fought.

Few would dispute it in a p4p sense.
[/QUOTE]If reports are to believed, Sasha wasn't exactly Spartan in training for Huck. And perhaps that was the same scenario for Louis against Conn. I can't recall reading much about his preparation.[/QUOTE]
Louis seems to have prepared diligently, but he made some mad decisions, such as dehydrating himself to cut his weight (the contract said that he had to be under 200lbs).
[/QUOTE]Sh*t happens in fights, especially at heavyweight. If an elite fighter takes his foot off the gas, even a bit, he can be in for a rough night against someone not of his caliber but who is hungry and motivated. We've seen this scenario innumerable times.[/QUOTE]
Innumerable times, I agree.

We have to consider the possibility however, that these smaller fighters enjoyed relative success, because they were smaller/faster/better pounf for pound!

 

Well it wasn't a 12 round fight. Had they been training for 12 rdrs then Louis as well as Conn would have been bigger. Louis wouldn't have drained himself down to sub 200 lbs and Conn would have been knocked out sooner.

 

Weight cutting methods are one of the biggest advances in boxing (not that that's particularly a good thing). Fighters nowadays can easily cut 10lbs for the weigh in and be in fighting shape come the next night. Huck may fight at sub 200, but I guarantee he comes in as a natural heavy. He's also a huge puncher at the weight which accounts for some of his success vs Povetkin. That, and his wild, don't give a f**k style. Fighters like that can sometimes pose more problems than they appear on paper. Look at Maidana vs Floyd, or Mayorga vs Forrest.

 

By the way, I noticed you called Golovkin an amateur in another thread, yet here you are making excuses for Louis's performance against Conn. Your bias is obvious.

 

No kidding.

 

Louis knocked the f--k out of Billy Conn.
That's not "barely beaten", that's "beaten up". When you're staggering to get up as the referee counts you out, you've been WELL BEATEN.
It was a 15 round fight. If it had been scheduled for 12, I reckon Joe Louis would have KO'd him earlier. But that's speculation. The FACT of the matter is that Louis won decisively.

My original point was ... Povetkin versus a 209 pound man (who weighed 191 to 200 in all his other fights) is THE ONLY indication of Povetkin versus world class "smaller" "cruiser-sized" boxers. That IS his body of work.
So, because Povetkin can flatten a 240-pounder it doesn't meaned he'd have an easier time against lighter men, and in fact he MIGHT have a more difficult time against the best of them.

Huck is one of the better fighters on Povetkin's resume anyway.

 

Larry Holmes was flat-out outpointed by Michael Spinks in Spinks's heavyweight debut.
Spinks had never even registered a single win against anything resembling a rated cruiserweight, he'd faced light-heavies only.
To be fair to Holmes, he was past it, but still the champion, and he went on to be competitive in the division a few years later.

It's strange how Joe Louis v Billy Conn (a KNOCKOUT WIN) is used as such "strong evidence" against Joe Louis, but guys like Foreman (who was decked by feather-fisted Jimmy Young and LOST ) and Holmes (who LOST in Spinks's HW debut) get held up as "superior modern" fighters who were too busy taking on modern "monsters" to struggle with weak or little guys.

 

Golovkin acts like he is the baddest man of the planet and gave Canelo a bunch of **** for fighting a welterweight yet when Golovkin fights a welterweight it is all of a suddenly ok. Golovkin couldn't even knock Brook down and lost rounds 2-4 imo. Looked like absolute garbage compared to his other fights and that isn't acceptable. Btw Golovkin wasn't draining himself down to fight Brook.

 

Sorry comment is in wrong thread.