Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

TV and Pay-Per-View really changed the way boxing has been viewed over the last 40 yrs or so........ Back when dudes like Dempsey and Louis were fighting, the fighters had to rely on the live gate in order to clearly determine their paycheck........ Today with Cable and PPV, fighters are making HUGE bucks win or lose............

I think Jack Dempsey once got lucky and pulled a fast one on the town of Shelby, Montana when he fought Tommy Gibbons with a half-filled stadium...... The town had promised a certain amount of money to Jack and they paid him...... But because of the poor ticket sales, Jack Dempsey boarded the first train outta town and took his cash with him...... Montana never called team Dempsey back for a visit..........
atsch

MR.BILL

 

Yes quite frankly.

A guy who has to take a four year layoff due to injuries and cancel fights multiple times due to injuries incurred intraining is not going to post 26 title defences or half a dozen in the same calendar year.

Some modern fighters could have handeled the schedul back then and Vitally Klitschko is noit one of them.

 

Valid question.

I will see at as a good win over a ranked contender and I will give him credit for it as I gave him credit for beating Kirk Johnson and give Joe Louis credit for beating Tony Gallento.

If Arreola is a weak ranked contender then a dominant win over him is still impresive.

That is how everybody should look at it.

 

Unless Chris Arreola shows us something he hasn't yet shown, I wouldn't give ANYONE much credit for beating him.
It's nothing to do with Vitali, just that Arreola looks like **** so far. And I'm hoping he looks a lot better in his big fight, so I can give them both credit.

 

Kirk Johnson and Sam Peter look like highly skilled pound for pound fighters in comparison to Gallento.

While I would consider both Peter and Johnson to be among Vitlai's five best wins, its not only that he beat them, its how easily he beat them, and how good he looked while doing it.

 

So who would you see as being Vitally Klitscko's five best wins and in what order?

 

I wasn't implying that the man would reign for 12 years, and accumulate 25 title defenses. But, when sized up against several of the period's top fighters, I think he'd do quite well. And I'm not about to use 1 or 2 freak incidents to think otherwise.

 

The trouble with these "freak incidents" is that whether they took place in the ring or in training Klitscko would not be able to take long layoffs for them to heal.

If he had injured himself training for the Ramhan fight back then they would have said "sorry old boy a contracts a contract". He would have had to take the Ramhan fight and then a few more in a relativley short space after that.

Unless he wants to go and take up Jimmy Braddocks old job on the docks of course.

 

I'm not saying they couldn't trouble Louis but judging Louis's opposition based on their appearance is a bit silly when the same can obviously be done to Vitali's opposition.

As said, Galento was out of ordinary in his day when fighters generally tried to stay at an optimal weight, but today he would fit right in there as far as looks go.

Perhaps not the 245+ lb Galento who was simply fat against the Baer brothers but the 225 lb Galento who went 14 rounds against Lou Nova.

 

Why don't we just go with he actually DID in the ring?
He has won 37 of 39 fights, stopped 36 of 37 victims, has never been dropped, never been truly Ko'd, and was never down on the score cards in a professional bout.