Joe Louis would beat Muhammad Ali… possibly quite badly

Not only that but both Schelling and Walcott landed heavy right leads and counters all night against Louis and he couldn't get out the way. That was Ali's money shot outside of his jab and he threw it much better than those men did.

 

In a fight against Ali, I probably rate Louis’ chances that much higher than most here but I won’t include any deep analysis as I’ve mentioned my reasonings before.

Interesting to wonder if the one of the most effective examples of unorthodox (Ali) is necessarily a lock against one of the most effective examples of orthodox (Louis).

Having said that, I also don’t think that Ali was completely unorthodox - I think he did quite a few things by the book - though his less conventional moves based on sheer athleticism, pure speed and reflex played no mean part in his prime game.

I think Louis’ improved performances in rematches indicated that Joe wasn’t always putting it all out there the first time around -

Joe could be economical to a fault - which in a way could bring him down more closely to the level of his opponent which could bite him on the ass. - but he wasn’t necessarily limited to that economy - as proven in several of his rematches when he put that much more into his performances after having become better familiarised with and more appreciative of the quality of the opponent at hand.

Imo, the Max Baer fight showed off Louis in the most flattering ways - Joe was not so much economical - rather, he was super energised showing off all his armoury - including Joe being more than acceptably nimble on his feet - just imo.

 

I think it depends on which version would fight each other.
Both fighters not only shaped their era, they even seemed invincible on their best days. In the tradition of "Toledo Dempsey" was Louis's terrific rematch against Schmeling, followed by two first-round knockout wins against John Henry Lewis and Jack Roper. Other fights, like those against Max Baer and Buddy Baer II, were no less impressive.

Ali, on the other hand, boxed like from another star in the 1960s.
Of course, an aging Cleveland Williams and Brian London were not the greatest opponents but that does not diminish his outstanding performances in my book.

Anyway, long story short.
Peak Louis vs 60s Ali:
I favor Ali here due to his phenomenal speed, slickness and reflexes. Joe Louis would be very dangerous, though.

Peak Louis vs 70s Ali:
I tend to favor Louis here. The Louis of 1938/39, the one who walked through Schmeling (my favorite fighter) like a hot knife through butter, was on a mission. I believe he was at his best during his mid-twenties... combining physical prime with some experience. I think a slightly slower version of Ali would no longer be sufficient. Nuances can be decisive when it comes to the very best.


But who knows, I surely wouldn't bet the house on it.

 

That was the first time things didn't go right for Louis. I think others could have done what Schmeling did at that time and so could have Ali. I'm talking about later.

Louis could not have done more in the rematch to suggest the first fight was a fluke.

 

Not that Louis was necessarily deficient in the same regard in general terms but perhaps the main edge I would afford Ali would be in the realm of all important intangibles - encompassing the type of qualities that instil confidence that fighter “A” will find a way to win even if one can’t exactly detail what that way will be - eg - the broad qualities of adaptability and innovation - for Ali, see Zaire.

 

Agreed...I was simply using this to debunk the idea that Ali couldn't hurt him...

 

Absolutely Ali could and would hurt him. Conn wobbled him. The best punches against Louis, scorching right leads and right hand counters are right in Ali's wheelhouse. He dropepd people with them, he wore people down with them, he stopped durable fighters. Tho not a puncher per se Ali was a great finisher with all that speed and the ability to put punches together at a mercurial rate. It's usually taken as a given Joe goes the 15 or doesn't get dropped etc. Like Ali, Louis recovered extremely quickly and was a danger as soon as he rose from the floor tho, of course. If Ali stayed a step ahead and joe struggled with his speed Ali could build up quite some accumulation. Ali hit Liston quite hard and plenty of times, as Liston himself attested to. Ali's own offensive prowess always seem to be forgotten in this one. He's easily the bigger man and brings his own dangers to the show.

 

This is a well thought out post.

 

Ali is bigger, faster, likely stronger and more durable to body and head.

Yet Joe Louis is Joe Louis - still, I do think that fighters like Dempsey, Frazier and Tyson pose more stylistic threat to him that I do Louis, Liston, Holyfield etc.

 

I think you are right old mate. For me nobody is going to outbox peak Ali. We've seen what he does to fearsome punchers/stalkers. I agree, the swarmer is the go.

 

Surely Ali was a great champion with the ability to overcome difficult situations and find a way...
But I don’t know if Joe Louis is inferior to him in this respect.
He was the first black heavyweight world champion after Jack Johnson (which should not be taken for granted) and he was almost 12 years world champion with 25 consecutive title defenses... Obviously a great champion as well!

The pressure and political dimension he had to deal with in the rematch against Schmeling... he icecold took his chance against a briefly careless Walcott... still caught Conn in a difficult fight...

He also had an excellent trainer who was on hand with help and advice.

Maybe Louis is a bit underestimated compared to Ali in this aspect... Well, he didn’t have these clear upset wins (like Ali vs. Liston/Foreman), but Louis had other qualities (which I already mentioned before + king of rematches etc....)
Another reason may be that Louis was quieter, and his era is not as popular as Ali's.

Of course, he did not have an unorthodox style like Ali. However, Frazier and Norton were more one-dimensional fighters than Louis.
Well, they were pressure fighters (not that Louis couldn’t put pressure on someone, e.g. Schmeling II), but anyway, Ali never fought someone like Louis, and vice versa.

As I mentioned, I see Ali's speed advantage. I just think he has to be at his best against the best version of Louis.
I would no longer favor Ali from the 70s (albeit early 70s Ali... tough to say).
Overall, both were great champions in their respective eras and were able to handle difficult situations. Marciano also possessed these qualities (Walcott I, Ezzard Charles II).

 

People forget Ali has a 66% knockout record in total

I'm telling u, if Ali hit Louis with one of those pull counters of his, i'm not sure he could've survived the incoming barrage..

 

He definitely catches Louis with either pull or right hand lead and he doubles up.

The issue here for me is does Ali tempt the lead from Louis and does Louis feint him into a counter to the counter?

I don't see prime Ali being KO'd - too much reflex, too much chin, heart and will to win, but I do think a few fighters, such as Louis, Lewis, maybe Wlad and Tyson could put him in a position where a kind referee steps in to stop him taking more punishment.

I think Louis poses more danger to Ali in a series of rematches but in a first time meet, must win, I think it could play out similarly to when B-Hop met RJJ. When the speed and skill is insane, I tend to back the faster fighter against the more technically sound fighter - just more likely to get their shot off, catch them with punches that don't align with the textbook in terms of sequence, angle and timing and then out of position to hit back against.

I've always said Ali would beat Louis on points, either 9 - 6 or 9 - 7 - have never thought that Ali could stop him, but hmmm, maybe he could catch him over the Louis jab and then follow up immediately with another strong right hand ala Folley.