Who Wins: 1951 Louis or 1991 Foreman ?

Joe Louis looked decent, but also stiff as a board and slowed during his two best wins near the end against Cesar Brion.........

MR.BILL

Note:

I thought Foreman looked rather spry and in control in his last two fights against Louie Savarese and Shannon Briggs when he was 48 yrs old.........

 

LOL I watched Lou Saverese go toe to toe with Foreman for 12 rounds in a dead even fight. Saverese was average...Old tyson blasted him out in 1 LOL. The fact Foreman could not put saverase down in a toe to toe match tells me something.

If you want joes two best wins..then watch Joe vs Lee Savold in 1951 and Pat Valentino in 1950...I think Joe looks tremendous at 37 for these fights. The only thing stiff you see there are stiff left jabs and wonderful fight finishing hooks.

 

Below is footage of a 37 year old Joe Louis facing Rocky Marciano, as well as a clip from Foreman vs Morrison. From what I can see, Morrison is using the ring, giving angles, and has a lot more quickness than Louis does. What similarities is Louis showing that lead you to believe that he would give Foreman " a boxing lesson?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVHNlm9MHPM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3CwnDvcG8E

 

I favor Joe Louis here especially in a 10-12 rounder. 15 rounds foreman has a better chance.


Morrisons accuracy and boxing skills were well below joe louis's. which is why morrison had to take angles. he did not have the skill, timing, and accuracy of joe louis to be able to stand in front of foreman and outbox him there. And lets not make Foreman out to be some monster when you stood in front of him. He was not Devastating George anymore. Alex Stewart bombarded him with blows right in front of him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR9zg7B-4p8

Watch how Louis slid in and out of range very well...this is how he will find george slipping in and out popping him with his jab and hiding behind his high gaurd. On the inside Louis has the veteran skills and savvy to block a couple of foremans heavy swings, and the accuracy to deliver a couple pinpoint hooks to foremans head. No they probably won't hurt george, but they will score points in the judges eyes and get foremans attention. I see Louis playing a winky wright role, simply outboxing george right in front of him. Louis will BOX george, not slug with him. Louis outboxed Rocky for 3 rounds by timing his shots very elegently and making the aggresive slugger miss. This holds some truth in the foreman fight. Louis is disciplined enough to not let his ego get in the way of his gameplan. Even if Foreman gets in a big blow from time to time, Louis showed in the Marciano fight he is a hard fighter to put away for a prime ATG, let alone a 42 year old side show attraction. I think it will take a sustained beating to put away Louis.

In that Morrison clip:

Watch around 5:40 how foreman just walks right into range and Morrison nails George with an easy straight right...I mean this would be there for Louis all night long with the left jab and if foreman gets even closer I expect louis to trifle a couple hard crisp left hooks and right hands.



And No offense, if a Peak Rocky Marciano( who IMO never looked as good as the louis fight) could not put Louis away early, then certainly 42 year old foreman would not. Peak Marciano was a much faster more skilled more aggresive finisher than 42 year old foreman was. Marciano came out guns blazing in the first 2 rounds vs louis and could not put him away despite landing heavily artillery...and in fact got outboxed in rounds 3-5. This would be a very tough fight for Foreman.

 

I pick Foreman pretty confidently. I would say 9/10 he would beat an aging Louis at this point. Who are these Rocky fanatics though? If they're in fact fanatics, then you're in fact a hater. Just face it, you'll be much better off after admitting it. Unless you actually get that bothered about fans of a fighter. It's quite odd.

 

Lou Savarese also slipped and dipped and rolled with Foreman out of respect.......... Savarese moved more against Foreman than in any other previous fight he had........ Savarese did well against the 48 year old Foreman in 1997..... I also think Lou Savarese was prepared mentally and physically very well for Foreman.........

As for getting wasted by Dave Izon and iced by Tyson later on, well, Savarese looked as if his heart and desire had gone south in those fights.......

Lou Savarese displayed some fire and emotion in his 2007 battle with Evander Holyfield, but it didn't really matter by then....... The aging Holy was still too spry for the aging and bulky Savarese...........

MR.BILL

 

Wouldnt this make me a Joe Louis fanatic? Because In fact I am. Got a problem with that? I am a Joe Louis fanatic.

 

What is controversial about it? Louis was the best. Deal with it. Foreman can't possibly think in his prime he would be able to beat the fast sharper accurate to the punch...Louis straight punches down the pipe would wreck foreman quicker than ron lyle almost did.

 

Neither did foreman in 1990s. Difference is Louis had much better fundamental skills, better jab, and more accurate faster punches than foreman in the 1990s.

Its also funny how you claim Saverse, Morrison, Stewart, Shulz all boxed the "Fight of there lives" for that one night against foreman. Seems a bit coincidental and far fetched to me. Perhaps they simply exposed how overrated a 1990s foreman has become by modern fans for that one miracle kayo?

 

He chose to use angles, because this was the best chance that he ( and most people ) had to beat Foreman. Trying to outbox him by standing directly in front of him would have been suicide.

I don't think Louis would have faired well with this approach either. Had he been someone with Holyfield's youth, chin, physique, etc, this might have been an option, but Louis looked very stationary against Savold and Marciano. This would most likely prove to be problematic against a man with Foreman's reach, power, and defensive capabilities. He was also throwing straiter punches in his comeback, as opposed to the looping shots he threw years earlier.

Tell that to 26 of his 31 comeback opponents, including the reigning heavyweight champion of the world.

He also paid a terrible price, as he was cut up badly and floored on two occasions. At 29 years old and in good condition, Stewart was able to weather the storm.. Could Louis? I will also ad that Stewart did not stand in front of Foreman the whole evening. Again, he did manage to use the ring at points.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR9zg7B-4p8

Sorry, but I don't think Louis is going to get away with merely " slipping in and out " for 10-12 rounds. Foreman had a decent wing span, reasonable timing, a great defense, loads of power and plenty of patients. At some point Louis is going to get caught, and i don't think George is letting him off the hook when he does.

Except you're looking at a single instance, and not what happened for the majority of the evening. Morrison did not just stand in front of Foreman the way that you are proposing Louis would do with great success.

Who says he'd have to put him away early?

And if a prime Michael Moorer who was undefeated, coming off a win over Evander Holyfield, was 25 years old, south paw stance, and many other things, couldn't beat Foreman, then what's to say that a 37 year old Louis is?

A tough fight? perhaps. An ideal matchup for Louis? I doubt it.

 

Foreman lacked reflexes basically at any age, but his legs were still strong as an Ox's legs were as an old fart in the 1990s............... Foreman never sat down nor was ever knockdown as a 38+ year old man............ Pulling that Jeep along the road in training really helped out Foreman's leg strength...... Foreman had legs as an aging fighter........

The decent guys who Foreman fought and beat in the 1990s were all pretty much known to be power-punchers to a large degree.......... "Cooney, Stewart, Morrison, Moorer, Savarese & Briggs." Them dudes were supposedly HARD punchers who could KO a sum ***** if they landed their bread and butter shots upside a mothers head....... Pierre Coetzer and Axel Schulz were more so boxers with less power......... STILL! Fact is, 99% of these guys all moved like the Dickens against Foreman..... Michael Moorer was pretty much the only guy to stand right in the pocket with Foreman, while doing little stutter steps to the sides here and there....... Christ, even Gerry Cooney boxed like a rabbit for a round and half before backing up against the ropes to get nailed.....

By 1990, Foreman was old, slow, but still powerful....... All of his competition all became boxers and tried to outbox him with speed and movement......... None of them really had the balls to trade with Foreman......... Punchers do often become boxers when they feel threatened..... Foreman was still a force / threat in the 1990s..............

MR.BILL

 

Agreed.. The fighters who had the best success against Foreman in the 90's were the men who were either decent boxers or ones who altered their styles for a day to give angles and stay out of harm's way. A 37 year old stationary target with a long history of getting decked even in his prime is a bad matchup for any version of Foreman.

 

Yes and no. Basically he's saying that Rocky fans boost Louis at this point to prove Rocky's worth more against a great boxer/puncher. Seeing as they think Louis was so great at this point he's trying to make a point with matching him up with another great fighter (This is in his mind).

To be honest, I think most admit Louis was forgone at this point. I know you defend this as a good win for Rocky. Louis was still a good capable fighter but certainly it's not like having the real Joe Louis on your resume. The funny thing is Rocky thought the same as you about the issue according to his brother. He didn't want people saying he "beat the old Joe Louis because he was still a great and capable fighter that came off many wins."

The only thing that impresses me about the performance is Rocky knocking Louis out of the ring. And the one punch left hook that drops Louis.

 

Foreman of '90 hammers Louis of '50 in my book.......... While clearly aging, BOTH fighters retained their respective jabs to the end............ I will say that Foreman's power and crispness did head south after age 45......... As for Louis, well, by age 45, Louis was a fat-ass wrestler making chump change........... I've seen pics of Louis as a wrestler....... CHRIST he was fat and bloated.......... Louis looked to be 260 pounds with ease by then............

MR.BILL

 

I lean toward Louis here.

I think that Foreman would possibly need a knockout to win and on ballance he probably dosn't get it. Sad fight to watch either way.

Now the Walcott of the first Marciano fight would humiliate both of them.