Earnie Shavers V Joe Louis?

Sure and others also did that, but they failed because they weren't good enough. When the only man who can beat you near prime was the former HW champion who was excellent boxer and puncher, then you should know you are damn good.

 

Just how? How can you watch Louis throwing the purest and most fluid combinations in HW division history and say he's not skilled? How can you say he had terrible defense when he beat so many good fighters?

 

Did they? Video footage was a rare thing in this time and Schmelling used it to develop his plan. Using video footage to figure an opponent out is more modern.

 

There was literally no significant change in training methods between the 30s and the 70s.

PEDs do not become a significant factor until the 80s, and in any event, they are banned in the sport.

If the later fighters are only winning because they have PEDs, then it is a sham!

I will say it again, there is no evidence that boxing participation increased after the 30s, and what little eveidence we have, suggests the exact opposite to be true!

 

Louis threw nice combos sure. He also left his chin out to dry for opponents to tee off on

 

Do you think that this hasn't happened in every other era?

Even if there were was no film of the fighter back int eh day, you could still watch them from ringside!

 

What evidences do you have that only Schmeling studied the tapes?

 

Sure, like all offensive players he sometimes left himself open to find his opportunities. It doesn't make him unskilled though. No HW fighter ever had such a complete offensive package as Louis.

 

Except of course when McCall knocked him out.

Unlike Schmeling, he only needed one punch to do it!

Louis had been fighting for less than two years when Schmeling beat him.

He was past his prime, coming off a period of inactivity, and arguably suffering from brain damage, when Charles beat him.

I give Schmeling credit for his performance against a very dangerous version of Louis, but I frankly give Charles more credit for beating Walcott!

The opposition that Louis faced at the time was Walcott, who had beaten Ray.

Charles was not even in the picture.

Bivins peaked while Louis was in the army, and a shot Louis beat him anyway.

Tompson was never a serious contender, and no he was not better than the more highly ranked opponents, that Louis defended against!

 

Braddock, Schmeling, Uzcudun, Carnera, Louis, etc all claimed Baer was the hardest hitting opponent of theirs. He also killed numerous people in the ring. I'd say that's pretty uncommon.

 

Your arguments were hard for me to counter until this. I personally thought Louis had a very fine jab, there are plenty of other boxing fans that would agree with me.

Lewis ended up (after Stewart) having an excellent jab, but not compared to Holmes, Louis, Bowe, or Ali. No.

Just my opinion. No offense intended.

 

Remember Joe Louis got decked by bigger men, Buddy Baer in 1940.

 

I'm wondering if Kev's back.

 

Joe Louis KO 6, but only because he usually took his time and picked his shots patiently.

 

Guys guys guys... Everybody knows that Joe Louis was better than Shavers and yes Louis should win the most of times but earnie shavers COULD KO LOUIS AND IT IS A REALISTIC END too.