Nikolai Valuev Meeting Joe Louis' s Title Opponents..?

One of the more silly things you have said on this forum.

Not quite up there with favouring Burns over Wilder - but pretty close!

 

Who did Valuev beat to suggest that he should be a prohibitive favorite over Braddock?

 

I must admit, that I can't think of a single one!

Looking at Valuev's record, I don't find a single name, who would be able to give Braddock a decent fight! So when I think about it... thanks to you, I'm beginning to see the light: That Braddock was from a far superior era, where today's best boxers would be completely lost.

 

Braddock unanimously overcame the odds to beat the feared Max Baer for the lineal HW title.

Valuev beat RING #5 John Ruiz for the WBA title via majority decision. The German crowd booed the decision as they felt Ruiz was robbed. It's debatable if Ruiz really should have even kept his rating or title having actually just had a NC with Toney after losing a clear decision.

 

Not really.

Braddock was just closer to being the best of his era, than the men that Valuev beat were to being the best of theirs.

You could have a low opinion of Braddock's era, and a high opinion of Valuev's, and still think him better than the men that Valuev beat.

 

That's a serious over correction. The best of Valuev's era...the K Bros, Chag, Sultan..etc would have done fine.

The point is....It's debatable if Valuev should even count as the best of his era, he was protected by King from the elites and only won the WBA title via a dubious decision against a man who had just lost the title but regained it through a controversial decision reversal.

Valuev would be alright in the 30s, but he would have a losing record against Louis' best competition.

 

I'm low on Braddock, but what makes you believe that Valuev would get past him with ease? He wouldn't stop him (Braddock chin was exceptional) and even though Braddock was very limited, I don't see Valuev dominating him on points.

I get that size is an advantage, but at some point it becomes more of a concern than advantage. Valuev should be praised for what he did DESPITE his size, not because of it. We don't have 7 feet tall 300 lbs boxers, because the sport doesn't suit giants. Just like we don't have 7 feet 600 lbs rikishi even though weight is a big advantage in sumo generally.

 

I have a lot of respect for Braddock, who went through a lot of hardship to win the greatest price in sports.

But lets be honest: he was realy only a courageous, durable journeyman - and extremely lucky to become world champ, when a clowning Baer practically handed him the title.

While size certainly isn't everything, Braddock would give away 9" in height, 10" in reach and 130 lbs (!) in weight. If Valuev was the worst giant to ever enter the ring, then Braddock would of course beat him - but I don't think he was. Sure he wasn't a bigger version of Willie Pep - but he wasn't completely inept either. With his stiff, stand-up style, I don't believe Braddock is the right man from that era to beat him.

 

Well, first of all, nobody beat Valuev without much trouble. The pressure he could apply was a lot to handle for 12 rounds.

Second, Walcott was knocked out by Abe Simon ... because Abe Simon was too big for Walcott. Abe Simon was seven inches shorter and 60 pounds lighter than Valuev. And Valuev was a far better boxer than Simon.

Just something to consider.

Conn and Pastor were light heavyweights. Today, Conn would've even be a light heavy. And the Conn who fought Joe Louis the second time would've never had a chance against Valuev. So I'm assuming you're speaking of Conn from fight one.

I know size isn't everything in boxing. But Valuev was a legit boxer. And nobody dominated him ever. Ever.

Finally, I don't see anyone Louis defended against beating Valuev. Go watch Valuev vs. Monte Barrett in Chicago. Barrett was a very good boxer, a rated contender, and his skills were no worse than guys like Bob Pastor. And Barrett was significantly bigger than those guys you mentioned (four inches taller, 40 pounds heavier than Pastor).

Barrett also had no trouble destroying giant fighters who actually couldn't fight, like Tye Fields.

But Valuev just walked him down. At the end, Barrett just couldn't keep him off.

This content is protected

A seven foot, 310-pound man walking you down, (well, against Barrett, Valuev was 328) throwing straight punches consistently (jabs, rights, uppercuts) round after round would've been too much for all of them.

Conn could look great against other smallish guys. People the size of Valuev changed the way the smaller people HAD to fight against them. They couldn't attack like they wanted to. And he tended to wear them all down from his activity and pressure. He didn't let people rest in there for any length of time.

As for Galento and those types, forget it. Not a chance. (LOL)

 

Let me answer that.

I think Valuev is much better than Paul Cavalier, Herman Heller, George LaRocco, Joe Monte, Billy Vidabeck, Nando Tassi, Joe Sekyra, Leo Lomski, Yale Okun, Billy Jones, Harold Mays, Babe Hunt, Al Gainer, Baxter Calmes, Tony Shucco, Tom Patrick, Lous Scozza, Al Stillman and similar (and more) assorted no-name brand fighters from that era that beat Braddock. A lot of those aren't even heavies by the standards of that day.

Valuev folds Braddock in half and puts him in his lunch bucket as a snack to eat on the bus on the way home.

 

I am not that high on Braddock, but he is a bit of a tricky case.

On paper he is easily the weakest of the 1930s champions, but there was a four year period from 1934-1938, where he was obviously a difficult fighter to beat. He was not by any means gifted his shot at the heavyweight title, and neither was he a champion who only had one good win. He gave Joe Louis a better fight than any of the 30s champions, apart from of course Schmeling.

I could not agree that Valuev is any sort of runaway favorite over him during that period.

 

I got smacked by guys that would have beat the crap out of him.

 

Burns over Wilde wouldn`t even be sanctioned today, lol