There's only one winner if it goes late IMO and that's Frazier by knockout. Question is would Louis be able to put him away early when given the opportunity? Foreman did it but it's a big ask for Joe.....
Agree with this. I think a few on here are probably underestimating Frazier, but I wouldn't bet much on Frazier-Louis either way. And as far as Frazier-Foreman goes, I wonder if the public perceptions of that fight would be different had Joe been quietly counted out from that brutal uppercut causing the second knockdown. (like most heavies would have!) Instead, people recall Joe getting bounced all over the ring over and over and I guess it looked bad and stayed in their memories. To my way of thinking, it was a tremendous compliment to Joe's will, heart and chin that he kept getting up from tremendous shots and that George couldn't keep him down.
I would certainly question the idea that Louis could not win late. I think that he was as dangerous in the later rounds as anybody quite frankly. Not the most probable scenario, but not an implausible one eiter.
It's not Louis I'm thinking of, if Frazier survives the initial onslaught then chances are he's walked through Louis's best shots. I can't see Joe holding Frazier off down the stretch and would end up battered before being stopped or knocked out.
Surely you didn't miss the times Galento hurt Louis and even sent him to the canvas right? By somebody not even 1/100th the fighter a Prime Frazier is, yet I'm supposed to believe Joe beats him in under 3 as you say? Comedic humor?
You know, I hate to be rain on the Louis party going on here, but he often struggled with the best men he fought. They either beat him, should've beaten him, or were close to beating him. Men lesser than a Prime HW Joe Frazier. I'm specifically talking about Schmeling, Conn, Godoy, Walcott, Charles and Marciano. We can all try and make excuses for the performances like... Pre Prime, just past his best, post prime... but the reality is still the same. He either lost or struggled mightily with the best he faced. That isn't even including the men even less than the ones named that were able to drop Louis. I don't care if he recovered quickly or not, he was put down and on his backside by men much less than Frazier. People dont' just get knocked down, he either walked right into shots or was countered expertly, but no matter the reason he was put down. Yet, I'm somehow supposed to believe one of the best HW in history, somebody better than anybody he ever fought... isn't going to have success and make it past the 1st or 3rd like I've been hearing. Yeah, and I have some cool swampland I can sell you 2.
The bar for being succesful against most fighters, unually involves lasting more than a couple of rounds! Louis gets held to a higher standard than most, because he is Louis! What if we took the same logic to Frazier, where every wobble was a mark against him?
You can use any wobble you'd like against Frazier, and it would still pale in comparison to the amount of times Louis was wobbled or put down. Which is, well, the point.
That would be because the number of times that Frazier fougth a ranked figghter, paled in comparison to the number of times that Louis fougth a ranked fighter! Even then, the people who wobbled Louis, would be better!
Not really since Joe fought better men. There's nobody on Louis' list that can compare with Ali or George, not a single person. So this whole notion that Louis' fought better men simply isn't true. What's more, here are the facts that can't be disputed... 1. Joe Frazier has the single best victory between the two 2. Joe Frazier didn't struggle as much with the best men he faced like Louis did. 3. Joe Frazier is better than anybody on Louis' resume, and if much less dropped Joe, how can we logical expect the same not to happen against Frazier To me, it's pretty cut and dry when it comes to this portion of the discussion.