Joe Louis vs modern giants: settling tbe debate.

He could punch but wasn't in the same league power wise and had a worse chin than both.

 

He was stunned numerous times by Billy Conn, if this isn't evidence of a poor chin I don't know what is.

 

Its not quite frankly.

If he had a poor chin, then you should be able to demonstrate it with fights where he got stopped.

 

How will they be able to resist his onslaught. He's almost 100 pounds heavier than all, surely he'll walk right through them, weight classes are there for a reason.

 

Do you really want to know? Buddy Bear and Tony Galento were two of Louis heavier opponents. Each of them floored Louis, and neither would be ranked in the top ten today. They were merely big guys with some power. Neither had good defensive or offensive skills, which is what we see today from the best of the heavyweight division.

Speaking of skilled fighters, are you aware Joe Louis lost more round than he won vs. the likes of Schmeling, Charles, Conn, and Walcott?

Well, it's 100% true. Joe Louis was too easy to hit, too stationary with his feet and had a low guard with a stick your face forward type of stance. Its there on film to see. Schmeling and Walcott floored him 5 times, Conn at 168 pounds stunned him and would have won if it was a 12 round fight, and Charles really gave Louis a beating

This means that skilled larger heavyweights like Bowe, Lewis, the Kltischkos, or Joshua would be able to land, the difference is they hit harder than the above best boxers who gave Louis trouble. And they also have significant height, weight and reach advantages.

 

Oh so predictable........

Let's see how it pans out first.

As for your question, for starters he has shown he has a great chin. You don't walk through kicks to the head off one of the most powerful kickers in the game if you don't have a great chin.

 

Well for starters he was stopped by Max Schmeling, does he now carry the same sort of power as AJ or Wilder?

 

He's got a great engine so far but that's all good and well when fighting mediocre opposition. Let's see how he does against top fighters before we can rate him properly.

 

Of course it's predictable because it's an extension of your own argument. If AJ is too big for some based on out weighing them by 40 pounds then surely Miller is too big for AJ by the same logic? Right?

Or do I misunderstand your argument about old HW being too small for today's division?

Don't get me wrong, those less than 200 wouldn't be fighting there unless they bulked up, but someone like Louis who was over 200 pounds often surely isn't too small for the division today?

 

I'm excited to see how his career pans out. It's clear to see he isn't as good as the three top men based on skill, so if he beats them by being bigger it will change how a lot of these discussions go.

If they beat him being better it will also change how a lot of these discussions go.

Basically Miller has the answer to all these debates.

 

I didn't say that though. AJ is not Miller though is he?

Miller could be in the league of a Buddy Baer, AJ has proven he is up there at the top of the division along with Fury and Wilder.

And talking of AJ, you don't think size would be a massive factor if he actually did beat Louis?

 

I don't see how size can be a factor. No one ever beat Louis by being too big and I don't think Joshua ever beat anyone by being too big. The issue would be a stylistic one, not a size based one.

 

And you don't think physical attributes coincide with style or influence the outcomes of fights?

So I'll ask you this simple question.

1. Do you think Lennox Lewis would have defeated Evander Holyfield and they been the same height and weight?

 

That's not a simple question at all, I wouldn't even no where to begin.

All I can say is I believe Lewis was a better boxer than Holyfield.