K2 Brothers vs The Brown Bomber

The real question is, are Purrity/Brewster/Sanders/Byrd and Grandpa Lewis better than Louis ?

The answer is no.................there are two face first Punchbags, a flash in the Pan Golfer , a pillow Fist and a old champ one foot out the door in his very last fight...........yet all of them won against the K brothers....while counting one of them out three times, the other one quit and was tko'ed while shredded to cheese.

Worst case Louis goes 4-1 but most likely sweeps them.

Plus it would be 15 rounders, that makes both K brothers drop 15-20 pounds right out of the gate in regards to fight preparation .

There is no way WK goes 15 while pressed and Louis is coming to win not loose like Toe Bunny Haye.

 

I for sure thought you would favor the more modern fighters

 

Yes, but the boxing world is a bigger place, now, so despite it not being the biggest sport anymore in America, there is still a bigger talent pool.

And the evolution is more of the athlete. In Louis' day, the gib guys like the Klits were clodhoppers, whereas now they are real athletes.

 

Why not whenever the smaller man gets inside on him? Just makes it that much more difficult for the opponent to generate any offense. Better than what Buddy Baer, who was similar in size to Klitschko, did, which was just lay on the inside for long stretches getting absolutely battered.

 

Joe Louis was not a small or short Man, he was skilled and could go 15 all day long plus he was a accurate fast lights out Puncher.

He would be a Heavyweight force in ANY era.

 

I'm mainly talking Heavyweights, where there's no weight limit, and the bigger/faster/stronger elements come into play. I'm talking about comparing the Klitschkos to Louis and his opposition, whom Vitali & Wlad would have about every possible physical advantage over, except for maybe B. Baer & Simon, who were both severely lacking in skill.

I really don't want to get into comparing guys from different eras from 175 on down. Moore was excellent is about all I have to say on that...

 

So you don’t believe boxing itself has evolved just the size of heavyweights?

 

Athleticism is definitely a vast improvement. That is undeniable. I'd never argue sports as such didn't evolve considerably.

Combat is vastly more complex with layered tactical and strategic choices on numerous planes to consider. Inside game itself is effectively dead, and with solely linear evolution, there should be no reason as to why it should be. Numerous fighters thrived on their ability to negotiate space inside, control limbs, and generate power from grappling positions.

The truly big man like Abe Simon or Buddy Baer being plodders back then was often a given. A lot of trainers outright refused to tutor for example Careers, as boxers back then were supposed to be balanced, accurate, and nimble—size supposedly hampered that.

 

Fair.

 

The answer is that I wouldn't bet a plugged nickel on him coming out of that series with no losses.

 

Both beat up Louis easily. Different times, and all that.

 

Yes we can - Furthermore, Louis' managers never let him face the black top contenders. He is somewhat equal with Marciano in terms of 3. rate opponents. Well, Marciano's opponents consisted of corpses from the graveyard...

 

The size difference really isn't in question. Louis fought an awful lot of guys who were <200, or barely over. Other Louis opponents who were comparable to modern Heavyweights in terms of size, just weren't very skilled. Some of Louis' better opponents, Conn (174), Charles (184), Walcott (194) were very small, and would have had a difficult time with the likes of Povetkin or Ibragimov IMO, whom Wlad dominated. While those three (and maybe a couple of others) were very good, I think the overall talent pool was deeper during Wlad's title reign than it was during Louis', so the Heavyweight division had evolved in terms of size & talent between those two eras IMO.

Review the records of both, and decide for yourself.

BoxRec: Wladimir Klitschko

BoxRec: Joe Louis

 

I wouldn’t question the difference in size but I do think it’s an overestimated advantage. heavyweights trained down in weight for a good reason.
Do you think Wladmir Klitschko was a better boxer then Joe Louis however? That is evolution in boxing itself you’re describing a trend in size.
If something evolved we’d have seen something better than the 1930s product? Has there been a better boxer than Joe Louis?

 

Louis himself was excellent, but I wouldn't rate the entire era off just one guy. He's almost universally recognized as Top 3 all-time, and I wouldn’t argue that based on what he did in his era. I just think most top guys in that era were undersized by today's standards (yes, I do think that matters), or just plain stunk, which makes it difficult to gauge what might happen when you start sticking Louis in with Klitschko-era fighters. Louis trying to walk down Wlad, Vitali, Povetkin, or even Byrd might not produce the exact same results for him as with guys like Johnny Paychek, Farr, and Conn.

Just curious, what would you say Louis' best win was?