Did Joe Louis duck any fighter???

Completley incorrect. You obviousely have not read a newspaper report on the fight. The New York Times had a segment on it. Walcott knocked bivins down, outboxed him, and the fight was alot more onsided than the scorecards played out. This was a big win for Walcott. He knocked off the previous unbeaten in the past 4 years Bivins in clear cut Fashion.


"Walcott won the fight going away" - New York Times



I could make an arguement Lee Q Murray and Elmer Ray were better than Bivins 1942-1946. Murray was twice jobbed against bivins and held was the duration heavyweight champion recgonized by maryland and ohio commissions. Ray beat better fighters, was more consistent, and was certainly more terrified by louis camp.

 

Old faded Louis? The Joe Louis of 1947 would have beaten the ever loving **** out of Jimmy Bivins. In fact the 1951 louis easily beat Bivins. No heavyweight in the world could have put on a better performance than the one Walcott did. Louis in 1947 still had blazing combinations and still hit very hard with a pistol like jab.


Walcott did have a close fight with Elmer Ray, but he also beat Ray clearly knocking him down 3 times. Ray was the # 1 contender, and louis camp wanted no part of him. In fact, I would go as far to say Elmer Ray was better than Jimmy Bivins.


Joey Maxim: Walcott argueably won all 3 fights. The one he lost AP scored it for walcott and reported "Clevelander won a very unpopular decision here last night". Even so, Walcott still went 2-1 vs Maxim, a hall of famer by the way.



Lastly, I see it was convenient for you to leave out Walcotts victories over Lee Q Murray, Tommy Gomez, Hatchetman Sheppard, Lee Oma, Joe Baksi...ALL top 10 contenders.

Now your telling lies. read a fight report some time. Should have been a wide unanimous win for Walcott. Walcott knocked bivins down and outboxed him.

Bivins during this time was getting gift decisions over Lee Q Murray(who louis camp wanted no part of), and losing clear cut decisions to Jersey Joe Walcottt. Yes Bivins was 26 years old and in his prime when Walcott knocked him off his pedastool. Do not try to argue differently.


Honestly you have it backwards...Louis camp never feared Bivins. They feared Lee Q Murray, and Elmer Ray, and Lem Franklin.

Your foolish. Both Bivins and Walcott met in there primes, Walcott won a clear cut decision. Walcott also beat far better opposition than Bivins did having beaten Ezzard Charles(not the 165lb teenager bivins beat, the one bivins lost to 4 times), Harold Johnson(better than bivins), Elmer Ray(Better than Bivins), Joe Louis in 1947(By far better than anyone bivins beat)...as well as the countless other Ring Magazine contenders walcott beat. Also Walcott being ahead after 13 rounds against a prime Marciano is something Jimmy never accomplished against an elite great heavyweight in his career.


Louis easily beat bivins in 51 at age 37. Bivins would have gotten killed in 46 by louis. Bivins was tailor made for Louis.



Skillwise: Watch the film. Walcott is loads better than Jimmy. Much better jab, much better footwork, he hit much harder, He was better technician, better defense, more elusive and slick, and he was physically stronger/bigger.

 

I think you're selling Bivins a bit short. While it's true that Walcott has the better credentials at heavyweight, Bivins was still a great fighter on his own who was more of a light heavyweight.

The fight fight was controversial but Bivins beat him decisively in their rematch, dropping Murray along the way.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAIBAJ&pg=2456,2248014&dq=jimmy+bivins+murray

Louis met Bivins in an exhibition and called him the toughest opponent he faced in such a contest.

I also wonder what filmed fights of his you are basing your opinion on Bivins. He doesn't look too impressive against Charles but he had turned into a bit of a journeyman at that point. He seems skilled against Moore although he was washed up. Perhaps you have seen the film of him in his prime though.

 

If Louis did avoid anybody it might well be sombody who would seem absurd in hindsight.

People today have their pet theories about who a champion of the past avoided based on looking at the records, but the truth is often more bizzare because the champion in question can only see fights that have taken place up to that point and can only guess at the future sucess of a challenger.

Louis himself said that the only challenger his managment purpousfully avoided was Melio Bettina of all people. He also said that he declined th fight Maxie Rosenbloom despite being confident of beating him because "he would make him look bad".

 

Never did I not say Bivins was an ATG fighter, he was most certainly. He argueabably is a top 50 heavyweight of all time as well. Just don't sit here and tell me he deserves to be rated on par as Jersey Joe Walcott because he certainly does not.

First fight was highly controversial. In Fact Murray deserved to win there series 3-2. Lee Q Murray is such an overlooked fighter. 6'3 210lb Ray Arcel described him as the best puncher of the era next to Joe Louis.

 

Simon, like Baer that same year, were intended only as big money rematches against fighters that had previously given Louis trouble; and like you said Louis donated his entire purse both times. Franklin was not the first in line for a shot anyway, that was Conn, which was also the most in-demand fight in the division. The Baer and Simon rematches were basically charity event time-fillers while awaiting the upcoming megafight with the #1 contender Conn. Louis was scheduled to fight Conn following those fights, but Conn ultimately pulled out with an injury, and the whole thing was scrapped altogether when both men went to war. And of course, any title shot prospects Franklin had were smashed anyway when he was basically "exposed" by Pastor and then quickly faded from the big scene. Franklin only had a relatively brief run (about 6 or 7 months) as a top 5 contender, and I don't believe was ever #1. Not really solid ground for making a case that he was "ducked."

 

The Louis camp avoided Bettina for one reason,he was a southpaw.Louis never met one.Hence my earlier post.

 

They both share the blame for that. Foreman didn't pursue a rematch straightaway (and in fact took a year off, except for his "one on five" sideshow attraction); and then when he did come back, Ali put off the match a couple times, and eventually Foreman lost to Young and that was the end of it.

 

As far as I know there's no real case to be made that he actually ducked someone. His reign after WWII wasn't really that much, though. Walcott was the only really dangerous guy who got a shot, even though the rematch with Conn made sense.

 

I think Ali should have rematched Young there, though. He should have promised to meet the winner of the fight and then made good on the promise.

Strange feeling to argue with you from this side, I have to say.

 

Mauriello may not look "dangerous" from today's perspective, but at the time he was actually the #1 contender.

 

Wasn't he sick, though. Was he really nr. 1?

Anyway, even counting him that was two dangerous contenders over more than 3,5 years....

I liked how he was quick to give rematches in close/controversial fights, though.

 

Franlin made his way up to # 2 in the rankings in a heavily bias racist white era.


Franklin from 1939-1941 went on a 19-0 with 17 knockout run..take a look at some of the names he knocked out during that time...Quite impressive. Filled with Ring Magazine contenders/very good fighters.

Franklin certainly deserved a shot over abe simon rematch, after franklin disposed the giant in 5 and was ranked higher.


19-0 with 17 knockouts winning streak!

 

Louis didn't fight too many times from 1946-1948 while he was still the champion. Conn, Mauriello and Walcott (x2) made up for those defenses, which isn't bad, but he could have made room for a title defense against Elmer Ray when he didn't fight for a year and 3 months in between the Mauriello and Walcott bouts.