Could prime Joe Louis overcome 1974 George Foreman

Target practice for Louis.
Foreman falls in 6.

 

That flaw could only have been exploited by a skilled counter puncher which Foreman wasn't

 

Louis never changed his stance other than the Schmeling rematch.
Schmeling didn't necessarily exploit a flaw. He just knew the range and angles to consistently land that right hand on Louis, and on top of that, Schmeling was in a class of his own when it came to timing, coordination and hand speed.
These are not Foreman's traits and he would never be anywhere remotely close to outsmarting, outmaneuvering and counterpunching a 22 year old Louis or any version of the bomber.
There is one or two Louis foes Foreman could be compared to and Schmeling was not one of them.

 

Louis cannot beat Foreman, Joe comes forward and doesn't really have lateral movement plus George has all the physical advantages, he simply cannot trade bombs with Foreman.

 

Have you ever watched a Joe Louis fight?

 

Excellent post. I have a similar opinion to yours regarding Louis that may not be popular. He was ahead of his time for sure, but not sure how he'd fair against the Liston's, Foreman's, etc. He was dropped by guys like Galento, Buddy Baer, etc who were on film just not very good and couldn't keep their hands up to save their life.

Louis shouldn't have had to get off the floor to beat them at all.

It's a complete mystery how he'd fair against even second rate punchers like Lyle, Williams, Bruno. I mean obviously he's still a heavy favorite against all of them (except Williams of course ) but he's been dropped and hurt by inferior punchers, so it's no stretch at all for them to do even better than the defenseless and primitive Galento, and Baer.

But against guys like Liston, Foreman, Wlad, Lewis? Sorry I can't suspend my disbelief to that point. As much as it pains me to say, I can't see him doing very well at all.

 

Second rate puncher Lyle had Foreman rocked terribly and hanging on for his life .... it is interesting to me how overrated first career Foreman has become by some based on the sentiment created in his second career ignoring the fact that the second career Foreman was sum total far better than the first .. of course George (1) had a shot against anyone based on what he brought to the table but his whole career was built on stylistic matchups against a shopworn, half blind, small swarmer in Frazier and a Norton who froze against every major puncher he ever fought .. Joe Louis had speed, a terrific jab, movement and exceptional two handed power ... I say he uses his jab and movement early , stings Foreman a few times along the way and takes him in to the mid rounds and takes him out, fairly similar to what he did to Max Baer ...

 

Great post.
No fighter who routinely gets hit by lead right hands would survive against Joe Louis. This would be Louis v Baer with a little more resistance.

 

I think the perceived “warts” during Louis’ career might be over exaggerated - he obviously held and frequently defended the title for a long time.

More frequent fights over a longer time, more perceived “warts” and YET, one small detail, the man was still always winning.

If the alleged degree of said flaws were as significant as some might suggest, then that doesn’t reconcile to Louis’ numerous, successful complexions and outcomes.

Sometimes, good old economical Joe had the appearance of 9-5 worker, punching out his job, technical proficiencies and executions aside, perhaps not always ideally inspired - but always getting the job done.

Perhaps that was part of the secret to Louis’ longevity. Without spikes or troughs, he kept it uniform and methodical, similar to the later career of Monzon and Carlos’ patient applications of himself.

Even so, Louis wasn’t limited to his so called lesser performances - he had a lot more in his kick if necessary.

As Joe might’ve viewed it, why do much more than was necessary? By and large, the steady as she goes approach worked quite well with some glitches here and there.

Louis’ performances in rematches provide very important insight, imo.

Perhaps it involved some corrections but perhaps it mainly saw a more inspired Louis, looking to “right” a less than stellar prior performance.

It’s been pointed to many times - but the pre title Louis who fought Max Baer was notably enthused and energised - he did some very nice things in that fight - and he didn’t appear to be the shufflin’ Joe that he later settled into more as his career progressed.

Foreman was an absolute force of nature - his timing and judgment of distance (at best) somewhat underrated imo.

Simple and cliched but true, if Louis can survive the early rounds onslaught, his chances of victory increase considerably thereafter.

In fact, in the midst of Foreman’s own take no prisoners opening rounds, Joe just might shock him with precise, powerful counters, enough to hurt George or at least quell his early rounds blitz.

Not an easy fight to pick, that’s for sure - but I think it would be a beauty. Like em both but my heart is with Louis.

 

Of course you take the miniscule part of my post that briefly mentions Foreman, as a jumping point to go off on a wild tangent about him. My God you need a life.

 

If we were to look at "1974" only through the fight of Foreman Vs. Norton (and if Foreman had lost to Ali 1.I 1975) they would have realized that Joe Louis had no chance.
imho

 

Looking back I'll concede my post on Louis was a little harsh (though the part where Williams' pulls an upset stays). Their's no shame in being floored by Marciano in your prime, let alone as a shot, balding, 38 year old addict. I'll give him a pass for that. I should've mentioned he was only briefly floored by Galento, and Buddy, and wasn't seriously hurt but imo it's a bit concerning he had to get off the canvas to beat them.

I think he had a better chin earlier in his career. He actually took some monster shots from Max Baer without flinching, and Schmeling needed to hit him with everything and the kitchen sink to put him down, and later even stated he'd never seen a man take as much punishment as Louis did, and remain standing.

From that point on, his durability was never quite the same imo, even if he improved overall as a fighter.

 

Well i do appreciate you taking on board and accepting my points.

Yes i'd agree the longer it goes the better for Louis. It's not impossible Louis might do damage early either.

Lets not forget however Foreman knocked Young stupid with one blow in the 7th round when extremely tired himself.