It would be interesting for the beginning rounds with the whole south paw vs orthodox but in the end Joe would piece him up and get the TKO or KO. Especially since Usyk is not a real southpaw boxer but a right handed boxer who uses the southpaw stance so his jab is stronger. This would be easily revealed by Joe. Easy money.
I am not sure what fights you are watching, but they aren't Usyks. He had the highest workrate of any current heavy, has thrown up to 930 punches in a pro fight, and doesn't even come to life until a few rounds in.
A boomer take would be nuthugging 60s-80s fighters, Louis predates the boomer era since boomers were infants when Louis was ending his career. If anything a boomer take would be writing Louis off as slow and unable to compete with heavyweights like Frazier and Foreman. I’ve definitely seen more boomers side with that idea. Anyway, even though I agree that Usyk beats all of Louis’ opponents, I can’t see how that’s proof that boxing’s evolved past Louis at all. If anything, I’d still call him one of the best technical heavyweights of all time. I see him chinning AJ and Fury, though struggling more with them than Usyk did.
Yes it has evolved. From fit, disciplined professionals who spend a decade learning their craft like Joe Louis to…Tyson Fury. What a colossal evolution it is.
You're basically telling me that Louis is a shyte boxer here. Baer found his boxing skills in a discount lucky packet.
I wrote Baer put punches together better than Usyk or Fury. How does that make Louis a "shyte" boxer? And if Baer found his boxing skills in a " discount lucky packet". What does that say about Fury and Usyk , when he's putting combinations together better than either of them?
I've been in and around the sport probably longer than you have been alive. Maybe you should stop watching it if you only see two guys hitting each other and not the technical aspect of it you sorely miss. And will never gain because your mind is clouded with what's new has to be better...
That would be an interesting fight. I would go with Usyk(maybe recency bias) I think he's footwork and southpaw angles give him the edge he's constant feints against a fighter like Louis who is a bit upright and stiff. But I wouldn't be too confident in my pick.
Told myself I wasn't going to post in this thread but what the hell. So I have a ton of respect for Joe Louis and what he did for not only the sport of boxing but for his country. The man is deserving of all the respect that he gets from folks but at the end of the day, that doesn't mean that greatness would translate in later era's. Just think what folks would say on here if Uysk went life and death with a super middleweight like Canelo Alvarez. That's what happened with Louis when a 168 pound Billy Conn was beating him cleanly before Joe found a way to win. What about Galento and how that fat piece of **** was able to drop Louis with a left hook? What if that happened to Uysk? Folks would loose their minds on here saying Uysk sucks. The reality is that Louis and Uysk are both great fighters and it's silly to compare them to each other. We should all just be grateful that we have a true champion in Uysk that has been absolutely dominant from his 335-15 amateur career, through his historically brilliant work unifying all of the cruiserweight belts by beating most of his opponents in their own home countries, to beating without question the two best heavyweights of his era. He is brilliant and human just like Joe was.