Prime Louis Vs Prime Usky

Sure I'm the one in denial pal. Louis's "robotic" movement is him trying to make his opponent lead by using subtle pressure ( You would have known that if you were knowledgeable in the art of Boxing ), but he has shown that he can actually be mobile when needed. Joshua on the other hand is constantly stiff and has not proven otherwise. The problem with you fans of modern fighters is that you dismiss older fighters without even actually watching them unbiasedly, because you just like to assume that newer and bigger is better. Boxing skill stopped evolving around the 1910's-1920's. A fighter that is an ATG would always be an ATG in any era after that time period.

Tyson, Ali and Holmes would trouble Louis for entirely different reasons than Usyk. Not because they're "modern and bigger", but because they are also ATGs with completely different styles to Usyk. And the only one i'm entirely confident in picking against Louis of those 3 is Ali. Louis would make Foreman's face look like Emett Till's, and Foreman is miles superior to Joshua.

After a certain point size doesn't compensate for skill. It's one thing to put little 5'7 Tommy Burns against the Klitschkos, or 6'1 Defensively oriented Jack Johnson against the 6'9 Tyson Fury and another thing to put a 6'2 200 lbs top 15 P4P all time great against a 6"3 220 lbs current ATG. But you're basically saying that one of the greatest fighters of all time in any weight class, is inferior to someone you constantly belittle as a bodybuilder with zero boxing skill. And I'm supposed to take you seriously here ? Please.

 

Think about football. Look at the average size and speed of NFL players in the 50's and 60's compared with today.

Look at MLB. In the 30's and 40's it was an all white sport full of pitchers that rarely broke 90mph with their fastball and worked in a warehouse in the offseason. Today you have a fully integrated sport with kids that have been playing extremely high level ball from the time they could walk with specialty coaches for hitting, pitching and fielding. Back in the old days, those resources simply were not there.

Boxing is no different. When I fought in the 80's we didn't know half what these guys know about effective diet and exercise to maximize performance. My trainers use to tell us to never life weights and to simply run long distance for Cardo. It's a different world now and these kids at the gym are in way better condition nowadays. Certainly better than Tony Galento who would never even get close to fighting for a world title today.

Edit, I screwed up replying because I am old and tired. I answered the majority of your questions in your original post. Just click expand.

 

Usyk wins comfortably

 

Yeah, just assume that I never watched this fight...

Have you really watched this fight, or did you just focus in that short moment of KD? Have you seen Louis dominating Galento and stopping him in brutal fashion, or did you just cherry picked a flash KD that meant nothing for the outcome of this fight?

Why Galento being changes anything? Ruiz is even fatter and he stopped Joshua.

Attacking someone's age is lazy, irrational and counterproductive strategy in discussion. I thought you're better than that and still hope so.

I didn't question your boxing knowledge here and I tried to respectfully disagree. It seems that you can't do that here though...

 

Boxing is different, than most sports you mentioned. The difference in most of them is drastic because of better training, nurtition and also far better equipment. Boxers were never elite athletes and they still aren't. Fighting sportsmen are extremely specialized, most of them aren't good from atheltic standpoint and they don't train in a way other sportsmen do.

People rave about weightlifting training for boxers, but the truth is that most boxers are relatively weak and don't use them that often.

 

I disagree 100% with literally everything you have to say and it is clear that your knowledge of boxing is not first hand experience. At this point, no need for us to chat about the sport anymore. You can now join my ever expanding list of ignores.

 

Quite the belated SCOOP….and you read it here first! Ha!

The one I tire reading of - in an effort to discredit Louis disproportionately - is the under par performance posted by Louis vs the mobile, smaller target that was Billy Conn.

Also, never mind that the probability of a less than stellar performance was higher in the context of yesteryears more extensive and far busier fighting schedules.

If the alleged, extrapolated consequences of the Conn fight - as they are so often negatively framed in the fantasy realm - were correct, then Joe Louis wouldn’t have enjoyed the incredible career that he did enjoy in the REAL world.

The first Conn fight is an overrated and overplayed “trump” card imo…and Louis’ end game KO was achieved after all and more resolutely the 2nd time around.

 

Yeah, banning people with different opinions is a perfect way to improve your knowledge on any subject. Have a nice day.

 

He's not amongst the top 10 hardest HW punchers, thus my point is valid.

 

How can you know that?

 

I think an underexplored aspect of this matchup is how Usyk uses size disadvantages to aid his boxing. Joshua had to reach down to hit the body that was supposedly vulnerable. Joshua is built in the shadow of the mega-HW and is built to unload big fluid combinations on similar sized bodies, which is why Usyk was able to create awkward style clashes and exploit AJ's size against him. Louis would be able to find the target easier on Usyk than AJ because Louis is similarly sized. That being said, I see an outboxing. The footwork would be a whole 'nother story.

 

No, it shouldn't, since there are at least 10 HWs that hit harder than him.

 

And how exactly do you know that ?

 

Right on. Personally, I've always found that speaking to people* about their views is a better way to learn.



* Note: Those who disagree with me don't count as "people."

 

Speaking as someone who lacks firsthand boxing experience (and whose opinion can therefore be safely disregarded), I think there's an element of truth in what @70sFan865 says.

If you narrow the field to the old school, traditional guys in the 70s and 80s "Golden Age," then most elite heavyweights boxers didn't perform very well in the kinds of generic "athleticism" tests (running, jumping, lifting, etc.) that people like football players can often do quite well at. Boxing is also a sport where extremely skilled, experienced, and relaxed guys like James Toney can come into the ring obese against men several weightclasses above Toney's natural weight and fight them to draws. Or win. You can almost be half-blind (as Frazier was) and remain an elite contender. Character, experience, skill, and intangibles count for a lot.

That said, here's the other side of the argument:

https://www.espn.com/espn/page2/sportSkills#:~:text=Boxing.,the 60 sports we rated.