Whats with this idea that Joe Louis was a weak champ or not as great a fighter as once thought?

Fair enough post U

 

Agreed on much of this. I was simply disagreeing with Chok's take on the fight

 

These myths about Tokyo Tyson need to stop.

 

Once Louis was hurt Schmeling kept Louis hurt. That's how max controlled him. Yes he patiently worked out a way to hurt Louis initially but it was no small fete to hurt joe and keep him hurt. Louis was good that night.

A fighter having his best fight cannot perform so well after he's been shaken like that. In a stricken state Louis was not going to resolve any stylistic problem or adjust. He was fuzzy after that knockdown.

Max had sacrificed one side of his face to lure Louis. He ate jabs on purpose just to find that distance. There's no predicting a fighter would do this. Louis felt he was on his way to victory, he had not done anything wrong. He had not taken unnecessary risks. Schmeling just read him. He had a plan.

 

I disagree.

The Louis of the first Schmeling fight, would have smashed Tokyo Tyson.

 

Yes, I think he smashes Tyson too.

 

Incidentaly, the referee almost stopped the fight in the first few rounds, because Schmeling was taking a beating!

Schmeling was actually warned that the fight would be stopped, if he didn't pick it up!

The events in this fight are much stranger than fiction!

 

This statement is absolutely true unless you mistake the good fighters with "ham and eggers".

Max Bear was possibly the worlds best active heavyweight when Joe Louis dismantled him. This is quite the opposite of bad competition isn't it?

Whilst I agree results against lesser men do not translate to better class fighters Joe Louis is actually one of the very few who genuinely did translate the awesome skills on display against ham and eggers against the very best fighters. That is a fact. That is as much a fact as saying bad competition makes you look better. Joe made good fighters look like bad competition!