Larry Holmes vs Joe Louis (at their best)

In my view, Louis would be up **** creek without a paddle if he faced either Ali, Holmes or Jack Johnson......... I love Ol' Louis, and he was the best of the era between 1935 to 1949..... However, Louis fought and KO'd lotsa' lesser men who either lacked skill or technique...... Louis was well schooled...... No doubt there............ But Louis never fought anybody who was the complete package....... "Charles & Walcott" were the best Louis ever fought, in a boxing sense....... And we all know Louis was over-the-hill after '48.......... So, Ol' Louis never really fought a serious fighter with "Pure" boxing ability while he was young and in his prime............ Billy Conn was a goddamn 170 pounder in '41........ I'm not impressed with Conn as a heavyweight challenger........

MR.BILL

 

I just watched Louis KO Buddy Baer and Abe Simon.... I have copies of these fights................ Both Baer and Simon were huge dudes with strength, but neither had any defense or savy........ Louis feasted on these type of dudes left and right as a young champion........ Maybe not as big as Baer and Simon were, but just as crude and un-polished.........

MR.BILL

 

Louis late stoppage. Larry's Jab may bother Louis, and he may even drop Joe with his right hand. But in the end, Holmes doesn't bring anything that Louis hadn't seen or overcome before, and Larry doesn't hit hard enough to keep Joe off him all night.

 

It says "Leonard-Lalonde" above the pic. So, you do need new glasses.

 

This is a fight I can see either man winning,its late so I wont go in to detail,a quick summary .
Although Louis was stopped by two big right hand punchers, he seemed to be most vulnerable to left hooks,ie B Baer,Galento.
Unfortunately for Holmes this was a seldom used weapon in his arsenal.
Holmes, as is common knowledge ,was vulnerable to right hands,unfortunately again for Holmes, this is Louis's money punch.

Holmes has the jab to take away the initiative from Louis,and the reach ,and legs to keep it.
Louis did not move his head much,and tended to pad around the ring waiting to unleash short hooks and crosses after his quick thudding jab had found the target .As far as punch variety goes, Louis had no discernable weakness, he had it all ,Jab ,hook,cross,uppercut [both hands], and all delivered immaculately, correctly.
.Louis was fairly slow afoot but had good positional sense,you rarely saw him reaching for a punch ,he was economical ,and accurate in his delivery.
Fast boxers with good legs bothered Louis ,Conn,Pastor ,Walcott, but that is the case with most punchers.
Holmes had the ability to beat Louis ,and enough power in his right to drop him imo,would he implement the right game plan is my question?
I think its a toss up ,both men face the best man they would meet,in their primes, if you watch a montage of Louis stoppages ,then vote ,you likely go for Joe.If a collection of Larry's wins ,including his masterclass stoppage of Cooney, vote Holmes.
Whomever gets your vote ,I dont see a stoppage here.

 

Holmes' jab would connect and bring him respect from Louis........ No doubt there....... Plus, no way in hell that Louis displays no concern over Holmes' sneaky fast and potent right cross, either...... Holmes' Left jab; right cross combo demands respect, as does Joe Louis' combo..... However, I think a prime Holmes had more savy and grace than a young Joe Louis had, so its my belief that Holmes actually had the better defensive skills..... I can see Holmes connecting on Louis' face with jabs from ring center and not getting tagged in return all that much..... No matter what, I gotta' go with Holmes........ Peace...

MR.BILL

 

Anyone comparing Holmes in a match up against Louis with Walcott is leaving out on key fact and that is that Walcott was a much bigger puncher than Holmes. This fact plus age is why Louis was so cautious in their bouts... Walcott could really crack with blinding speed from all angles and was a tough match up for an aging Louis.

A prime Louis had an exceptional jab of his own and it would give Holmes trouble. Louis was 6'2" and 205 or so so they really comparable in size. Holmes' main weakness was that he often exposed himself to right hand when spearing his jab. A prime Louis could have timed it , reached over and cracked him badly ... Watch the first Norton fight and see how many time Norton landed his own overhand right and this was a 34 year old Norton ...

I say this is a very competitive fight but I like Louis.

 

Holmes would beat Louis.

How many times he could beat him is another matter. I'd expect Louis to win a rematch, and then maybe another one.

 

YES!!! But Louis had an "Off Night" when it came time to fight a "Pure" boxer who used speed and movement to off-set Louis' attack........ I think it was more so Conn's style that flustered Louis rather than an off night back in '41.....

The other so-called "Off Night" would be Louis' first fight against Arty Godoy in early 1940's....... Godoy was tuff as nails, but also limited in his to box.... Godoy was a 40's version of 'Oscar Bonavena.' Nothing really special; just rugged.........

ALSO!! Joe Walcott's left hook was potent, and Walcott had a hard right too, but I cannot really say that Walcott had more power than Larry Holmes......... Holmes' left jab was a weapon...... Holmes' right cross knocked melon-farmers out.. Holmes' power is often underrated.......

AND!! Both times Holmes was dropped in his prime by the likes of "Shavers and Snipes," Larry Holmes was caught daydreaming for a split second......... Holmes admits he lost focus for a brief moment on BOTH occasions since things were going his way in them fights........

Forget Holmes' loss to Tyson in 1988....... Holmes at age 38 was a soft 227 pounds at the time and rusty as a door nail in a haunted house.......

You cannot judge Louis based on his loss to Marciano in '51, either.......

MR.BILLbbb:good

 

Well Louis sure didn't have an off night second time around, which tho much later was vs a Conn who hadn't lost since even if fighting stiffs.

They all have off nights, Holmes had plenty.

Suze can argue this one.

Sure, and if things went his way vs Louis he'd be on his arse again. Well, given the immense talent difference he need not even lose concentration to be in such danger. People forget Louis is rated the greatest all round puncher to ever lace em up.

If Holmes gets hurt vs Louis chances are he doesn't survive. This is no slow clumsy Shavers or ordinary Snipes, this is one of if not the greatest finisher ever.

Also, beyond this little lapse of focus was a constant struggle with Weaver.

Never mentioned it did i?

Well a dickhead could, which is why i left Holmes past prime struggles. I even gave the Witherspoon life and death struggle grace, tho i didn't exactly have to. Holmes was champ at the time and champ for sometime after.

 

I will agree that Joe Louis was a great combination puncher with great power in both hands, however, Louis was often tagging stationary punching bags that a blind man could hit...... Aside from Billy Conn in 1941, who else was there that really knew how to slip, duck or dodge a punch??? I can't think of anyone else until we move way ahead to '48 with Joe Walcott............ Overall point being, Louis would NOT tag Holmes nearly as much as he tagged and decked his "routine" of the month victims of the late 30's and early 40's......... Holmes' defense was much better on a whole then them dudes Louis KO'd........

As for the "Louis-Conn" rematch of '46, well, neither man was the same, but Conn had slipped further and was soft in the girth area...... The beatdown was on the wall there........ No contest.....

FACT! Jack Johnson was killed in an auto crash in North Carolina while driving to New York to see "Louis-Conn 2." Johnson never made it...........

MR.BILL