Who had more skill? Joe Louis or Wlad Klitschko?

I think he lost the first Walcott fight and so do the majority at ringside. The left over films confirm this too, with an ending of loud boo's. Wlad moved well, was hard to catch cleanly and was a master at keeping his range.

Which skilled big man did Louis ever face? Despite having a heigh and reach edge, Louis had issues out boxing smaller men!

Not on defense, that is for sure. I would say Wlad's jab and right hand were better. Put Wlad in with those bum of the month guys and those light gloves, there might be a fatality in the ring. When I watch young punchers on the way up, they blast guys out. Sure their competition wasn't the best, my point is Louis's wasn't either.

I agree he was a top combination puncher.

Stamina isn't what I meant by skills. Wlad had good stamina too. Brewster had a top chin and power. If he landed the same, Louis would not recover either.

Weak is the wrong word, he took many shots from punchers. It was average. Louis was Ki;d by men under 200 pounds. Wlad never was. Only the biggest punchers stopped him, outside of the Purity gassing fight.

Ali held a lot too. Louis sometimes fouled. Louis was not a good clincher, and had slow feet.

Other way around. Schmeling was stopped quite a bit. So was Walcott. DO you need a good chin to beat Louis? Nope. Both beat Louis. Louis' smaller size, low guard, slow feet and so-so chin spell doom for him in this fantasy match up. Wlad would Drill him and keep his distance, and if needed tied Louis up. I don't; think Louis could take too many of Wlad's power shots. By chance did you see my break down of how Louis, who you think was more skilled did against he best boxers he fought?

 

Joe Louis' scorecards vs the best boxers he fought.

Some believe Louis, who in my opinion and many others fought in a down era of boxing was a near perfect boxer. I'm not one of those who thinks that way because I have seen his films vs. men who in many cases were giving up height, and reach to him. Yet they had no issues landing on him. With the superior firepower power in all cases, if Louis was this master boxer type ( Offense and defense ) he should have dominated on the scorecards. Yet he was often floored or behind.

Let's add up the rounds were given to Louis vs the best four boxers he fought. To use a qualifier, I'll average out score cards given, and not penalize Louis for knockdowns in the round because back then there were no 10-8 rounds. In the case of Schmeling vs. Louis 1, I could not find score cards so let's say I'll be very generous and give Louis 4 rounds of the 12.

The best four boxers Louis fought in my opinion were:

Schmeling
Walcott
Conn
Charles

1. Schmeling-Louis and Schmeling fought a combined 13 rounds. Louis won but 5 of 13 rounds, and I'm being generous to Louis. Schmeling was thought to be passed his best for the first fight, meanwhile Louis was coming off his best career filmed performance vs Max. Baer

2. Walcott vs Louis. Both men were the same age in both fights. 26 rounds fought, and an average of 12 of them went to Louis. The first fight was rather controversial and the second one in my opinion had Walcott well out in the lead. But I'm using the judges official cards since we have them.

3. Conn vs Louis. 21 rounds were fought. Conn looked terrible in the rematch and retired the same year, but hey that's part of it as Schmeling was thought to be passed his best in the first Louis fight. The score cards awarded 10 of 21 rounds to Louis on average

4. Charles. This time, it was Louis on the decline. 15 rounds were fought Charles stood right in front of Louis, who was on big time winning streak and still had his jab and power and whipped Louis badly. Louis won three rounds on average and, to be honest, that seems a little high.

Summary. Louis won just 30 of 75 rounds fought. This is just 40% of the rounds fought. Yet most think he was more skilled than Wlad? Wlad was only out boxed by one guy at age 39!

 

Janitor,

You have to explain in detail why. Saying it means nothing without the context of keen observation from the video. If you're up to the task, please tell us why.

No less authority than Manny Stewart called Wlad the most gifted man he worked with. While he was a trainer, Wlad's domination in his fights for ten years, not needing a miracle come from behind Ko, or favorable judging speaks volumes of how skilled he was!

So if you think those guys who outboxed Joe Louis were better, show us why. Be warned none of them came close to matching Wlad's near flawless record for ten years without losing, or the threat of losing.

 

You can't even get that right. Wlad was a humble type of guy and excellent ambassador to boxing. Which top guy did he miss out on besides his brother under the age of say 37?