Larry Holmes vs Joe Louis (at their best)

I was going to pass this by, but I'm still waking up and needed to get my thought processes going for the day, so I might as well use this to engage myself.

For me, Holmes was at his best in Shavers I, Cooney (according to Larry himself), and Cobb (a challenger he shut out who previously had taken Norton and a then undefeated Dokes to split decisions). When evaluating the uppermost potential of Louis, I look at Max Baer and Godoy II first.

Holmes had the combination of mobility, jab, durability and patience necessary to conservatively box Louis over 15 rounds. Matching Larry's patience, I think that Joe runs out of time waiting for his prey to fatally expose himself by coming in on the attack.

Even against Cooney, Holmes never really jettisioned his boxing to go for the kill, even though he might have been able to finish off Gerry anytime from the second round on. (If Cooney had survived into the final two rounds, I expected Larry to end matters with a torrential onslaught. Because of the big payday and publicity Holmes-Cooney garnered, I believed Larry carried Gerry to sell him as a viable challenger for a rematch. After the match, he tried to sell the public on Cooney's credibility, but admitted to Cosell in an unguarded moment that it wasn't really a particularly difficult fight for him.)

Before Conn and Walcott were taken out by Joe's combinations, they were first frozen in place when stunned. Larry remained a moving target if staggered, never a clay pigeon for target practice. (Of course no single punch would knock him out at his best, or Shavers and Snipes would have taken his title.) When surprised by unexpected adversity against Snipes and Williams, Holmes was able to mentally adapt to the changing situation, not merely persevere through heart or patience, but proactively adjust.

Louis would probably wait for him to make a mistake then capitalize on the inevitable opening. But Holmes recovered from his errors very well. (He actually came within a few ticks of surviving that final round with Tyson, staving off the last knockdown for 45 seconds.) Joe was highly motivated to avenge the lackluster showing in his first bout with Pastor in their rematch showdown. Despite this, the challenger survived multiple knockdowns in the first two rounds, proving that Louis was not always an infallible finisher during his prime. (In Joe's previous outing, Galento famously came off the deck to return the favor to Louis.)

Due to a right hand injured early against Farr, Joe used his vaunted jab to outbox Tommy over 15. Still, Farr was able to use his own jab to remain competitive with Louis, and Larry had the best all purpose jab in the history of the division. Joe did have some early trouble negotiating Carnera's slower pesky powderpuff jab, and Primo was the only longer armed opponent of his career who made consistent effective use of a reach advantage.

Cutting off the ring wasn't the strong suit of Louis that it was for Foreman. Nor did he close with the consistent speed of Frazier.

Joe was the most accurate of the heavyweight champions, but this was in part because his were mostly short punches, and he didn't usually pull the trigger unless the objective was within range. Holmes would tend to keep his distance.

After Futch was hired by Holmes, he taught Larry to stop lifting his left foot when shooting his right, thus tipping it off. Holmes could take some advantage of what Schmeling discovered, having a longer and faster right than Max.

This one's going the distance. If I'm right, can Louis win on the scorecards?

 

I Like Holmes in this fight.The jab of course but also the defense and outstanding ring generalship is what Ive always admired in him.I think He contains Joe and takes a UD.

 

While Holmes was more durable than Walcott he was not as elusive or mobile and I don't think being bigger really helps you much in this particular game.

The question you should be asking is which fights Holmes shows the best mobility in and is that going to be mobile enough to keep him out of harms way.

 

A fair response,

Let me also point out, that I have done this debate many times, and on occasion, have even picked Holmes. The truth is, I don't think anyone who is honest and well versed in both of these men's careers can decisively pick one over the other. Anything can happen. If Holmes establishes a rythym where he is outboxing Louis in similar fashion to the way Billy Conn was, my guess is that he finishes as the winner. On the other hand, if Louis peggs him up against the ropes and starts unloading the way that Mike Weaver did at times during his fight with Larry, then Louis is going to hurt him badly...

Could go either way I guess.

 

Holmes' legs looked great against Shavers on BOTH occasions........ Holmes got lazy for a brief moment in the rematch and got clocked for it too..... BUT! That woke his ass up.... Also, Holmes looked great in his movement against Cooney, and Holmes was thought to be sliding at age 32 in 1982..........

In my opinion, the Holmes from '78 to '82 was just too good, big, fast, accurate, graceful and savy enough to pile up points on Joe Louis for a lopsided decision or late rd. TKO...........

Styles make fights, but no way in hell Joe Walcott of 1947 to 1952 beats a late 1970's or early 80's Larry Holmes in the ring........ Holmes was too much for Walcott with ease.........

NOW! Forget the Holmes who was battling Carl Williams and Mike Spinks in 1985...... That version of Holmes was soft and no longer training hard for fights....... Holmes was coasting after he wasted Marvis Frazier in late '83...... The next time Holmes trained with conviction would be for his '86 rematch with Spinks........ That Larry Holmes was in-shape and ready to kick some ass......... We ALL know Holmes was reamed by the judges........

MR.BILL:deal

 

It was the best recovery of a brutal knockdown I've ever seen. And that includes Ali rising in the last round against Frazier in the FOTC from that perfect left hook.

 

Did you like it? I thought it was ok. Nothing too special.