Joe Louis or Muhammad Ali who do you rank higher?

I might give it to Louis on consistency. His first career was really the model championship reign. Aside from one hiccup in the form of Max Schmeling he stormed through the ranks, won the title in decisive fashion, defended often and against good opposition (mostly) and beat most of his opponents convincingly, either by KO or a fairly clear decision. He's the greatest puncher in the history of the heavyweight division, if not all of boxing, and is basically the pinnicle of his style. I rate Ali higher head to head, and I think his wins over Frazier, Liston and Foreman are better than anything on Louis' resume aside from maybe his KO over Jersey Joe Walcott.

 

Ali has wins over 3 fighters - Foreman, Frazier, and Liston - who could at the very least be argued inside the top 10 all time of the division.

The best Heavyweight Louis beat was Walcott, a top 20 all-time Heavyweight who many feel should have gotten the decision in their first fight (a past prime Louis though). His best win after that is against Schmeling (who did beat him in their first fight), and a Lightheavyweight who he outweighed by 20-30lbs and who was clearly beating him before the 13th round stoppage.

I think it's incorrect to rate Louis higher. Obviously it's all subjective, but Ali's resume is far superior, so much so that I just can't see anything Louis can claim overcoming it. I also feel Ali beats Louis prime for prime, but in the end, that should count for less both ways.

 

Johnson and Dempsey, both beat Louis,imo.

 

The answer is much better handspeed. Frazier had fast hands too, but then again, Frazier put him down. You might make the case that Louis had better two fisted power.

As for those other guys, including the much vaunted Liston, they just didn't have the speed to keep up. Louis was notoriously deliberate in his footwork, but when he saw what he wanted, came to life with incredible hand speed and finishing ability.

 

I have a hard time seeing Louis coming back after a 3,5 year lay-off and dominating the 70's. I think even Quarry would have been a very tough fight for Louis as first opponent after the lay-off.

In the 60's I see Louis beating the same guys Ali beat, possibly with the exception of Liston.

 

What fighters do you see coming back from a 3,5 year lay-off and beating Foreman, Frazier, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Shavers et al.

I honestly even don't see many going past both Quarry and Bonavena in their two first fights with that much rust on them. A peak Frazier in the third fight seems almost like the quissential nightmare.

 

Ali didn't really dominate unless you're talking about media hype and fame. He didn't become champion again until two months shy of 1975, then the following year had laughable decisions vs Young and Norton, as well as tedious fights inbetween. 18 months after the latter lost to Spinks. Over the decade he came out of it as #1 in the division but he hardly dominated.

 

You don't think a top 10 all-time calibre heavyweight could resume after a lay-off and beat Jimmy Ellis and Oscar Bonavena? :huh

 

Coming off from a three year lay-off and beating Quarry is a consistently underrated accomplishment of Ali's. I guess it gets over-shadowed by all of his others.

 

I'm Ali's biggest fan but certainly for legacy i wouldn't have problem with anyone picking Louis over Ali as the number 1. Head to head i'd have to go with Ali. A valid point was made in an earlier post about Joe's relatively slow feet against the fleet footed Ali being a factor in him not being able to get close to Ali.Louis' footwork was good,he gradually crept up on his opponents who thought they had him at a safe distance and before they realised it he was in range and unloading his bombs.I dont think it would have been effective against the constant movement and changing angles of Ali though.Look at the trouble Billy Conn gave him,although i realise Conn isn't a complete like for like comparison.Conn was elusive though and had good defensive skills.
If Ali got careless though Joe was quite capable of taking him out,even allowing for Ali's great chin.

 

That was "Quarry" and Bonavena. Not Ellis. And I didn't say that none would go past them just that some would come unstuck. Frazier would in all probability not get past Bonavena after a long lay-off, since he hardly got by him as it was. I also think Quarry might beat him, ife he was Frazier's first opponent for 3,5 years. I would pick Foreman and Marciano to lose to at least one of them after a long lay-off. The Tyson that met Buster Mathis jr could very well have a nightmare with Bonavena, and so on...

 

Fair enough. He did have a good record against the best of the 70's, though. Especially the best of the first half of the 70's. He's 12-2 against Foreman, Frazier, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Norton, Lyle and Bugner. If we say that Norton won their rubber match it's 11-3. It's still pretty close to domineering.

 

Hardly fair as Ali's first reign was cut short at 25 and he was not allowed to box for the next 3 1/2 years (and they say 26-28 is your prime years) . He was also undefeated in his first reign - 29 wins 23 by KO.

 

I was just referring to two names from the list in the first paragraph mate, not in relation to his first two comeback fights specifically. Anyway, I've always thought very highly of his choices- very difficult opponents, especially Quarry (while Tyson chose the likes of 'Cocoon of Horror' McNeeley). Bonavena could have been a nightmare for Tyson but Ali had enough difficulty with him as it was, I'd still bet on Tyson to stop him in a brief contest, albeit a war. Still, the lay off didn't do him much harm later on in his career, he was a very old 34 as it was (in 1976), and extra three years and, possibly, 10 fights could have seen an earlier deterioration.