Joe Louis vs Vitali - the missing poll.

why is vitali being matched with ATGS?!

 

Ask Lennox Lewis......

 

you again... ha#

he was a stand in for Lennox, he wasnt automatically matched with him. And we all know what happened so why ask lennox, just google it to learn it was a 6th round stoppage.

 

And he was up on the scorecards against this ATG.....

 

Ask Chris Byrd ! An unprepared featherfist beat the prime Vitali...

 

Hahahaha funny listening to the idiots claiming victory for Byrd.........

 

Opting out to debate me, but creating a meaningless poll that hides who voted for whom and prevents explanation as to why they voted the way they did? JT you're brilliant!

For those who want to know:

I listed the best Louis fought in the 1930's in another thread. Clearly, most would not be in the top ten today, and the best he fought did the following:

1 beat him via KO - Schemling
4 knocked him down - Braddock, Schmeling, B. Baer, Galento
2 Others took many rounds from Louis in a decision loss - Godoy, Farr

Those were the best Joe Louis fought from 1936-1940. A 5 year period.

Post that, he was gifted a decision from Walcott, got badly beaten by Charles, and later 10 counted older vs Marciano. Those three were the best Joe Louis fought post 1940.

For sure, Vitali Klitschko would beat all of the above men, and struggle far less than Joe Louis did.

But vote for Louis if you must. He is popular and Vital has many detractors here

For those who use logic, if Joe Louis' competition wasn't very good, and Joe Louis struggled with them, what does that tell you about Louis?

 

Chris Byrd was in fact victorious.

Just saying.

 

By default not through his skill, don't play silly beggers.

 

Vitali would probably struggle less because of his style combined with his physical attributes. Vitali had height and length that Louis didn't have and thus could fight in ways Louis couldn't vs six foot tall men.

Many think that prime Holmes would beat a prime Foreman, but did Foreman struggle with Ken Norton like Holmes did? Shavers defeated Norton in an even more dominant fashion than Foreman and Holmes went life and death with Norton, yet Holmes twice beat Shavers decisively (minus that close call in fight #2).

 

No not by default.

He fought a smart fight, and of course was lucky.

There is no moral victory if an injury contributes to your loss.

It is still a straight up loss.

 

Vitally would have done this.

Vitally could have done that.

But he didn't.

You are coming across as being a bit like a tramp scavenging through a dustbin, desperately scavenging for some scraps of an argument to support your hero.

In the end all you can come up with, is what you say he could have done, but never came close to doing in real life.