Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

Vitali less skilled than Carnera. :shock:

 

they drew because langford was 21 at the beginning of his career and walcott was 31 at the end of (but still) at his peak.

walcott was also KOby4 vs. the #2 of my list , while still at his peak.
:tdh #1

head to head is the base of everything.
Langford unlike Robinson , was talented enough and so thoroughly outclassed his time , that no division below hw had enough fighters that would have agreed to share the ring with him to keep him in it.
:tdh #2

all 3 were never legally stopped despite facing lots of good and above oposition , alas , they could stop their opposition , for the skeptics , boxrec is there for you.
:tdh #3

for a head-injured individual maybe.

:****off

 

Which "skills" are we talking about? Vitali rarely throws more than a left hand (hook or jab). All of the the big guys Louis fought did this, most mixed their right hand in their a lot more often. And while I wont say that Vitali doesnt get his body behind each shot, there is nothing which suggests he is better or worse than any of the guys Louis fought in this area. I have already addressed his combination punching, he virtually never throws a left right. I suppose you could argue that he left jabs, left hooks a little bit more than the others, but so what this is not being more skilled as the other fighters to the same.

In regards to defence, his hand positioning and defence might be effective but it can hardly be described as "skilled". I described it in the last post. You talk of stationery feet, but Vitali is hardly a twinkle toes. His footwork is nothing overly special. Probably his best skill is the leaning and swaying to avoid punches combined with his ability to land the left while doing so. Personally, i would argue that he is often off balance and the left is mostly an arm punch, but clearly his power is enough to discourage fighters (Louis included, who i agree was not).

In any case, please explain what "skill" he has that Louis' opponents didnt. Am I looking at the wrong fights?

Incidentally, how could what happened with Conn, Pastor and Charles have any bearing on how Vitali goes? Vitali is not even remotely similar in style to these fighters. And by the way none of these fighters had virtually no guard when they threw their left.

 

He might (or might not) be a better fighter.

But what skills does he do better, there might be some, but no one has been able to point to them on this thread, just yet. And i have already suggested some areas that he is not as good at.

 

The way I see it Klitschko is more durable than Carnera and he probably hits harder as well.

I cannot however see any basis for saying that he is technicaly superior, let alone saying that he represents a quantum advance in boxing skills for a fighter of that size.

 

Agreed. Although Carnera took a pretty good punch, and certainly his chin was more tested than Vitalis.

He may do some other things "a little bit better" but it is the quantum advance that i take issue with.

 

Your points go absolutely nowhere, okay Langford fought everyone at the time and was a great pound for pound fighter but he achieved little at welterweight compared with Robinson, who did Langford beat at welterweight to make him the best ever?

Walcott had the better record over Young Peter Jackson according to your Qur'an, he lost one fight against him apparently by what should have been a low blow but also managed to beat him in two previous fights, from what I can see Walcott was by no means in his prime by the time Jackson stopped him, he'd lost three of his last six fights.

Your last point is the biggest joke of the lot, just because those three guys were never legally stopped you think they deserve to be top 10 welterweights? Aaron Davis LOST against Meldrick Taylor, so where is Taylor in your list? Where are all these big wins Davis supposedly has? Mark ****ing Breland? A nearly fourty Vinny Pazienza? You think that makes him a greater welterweight than Kid Gavilan? Mickey Walker? Jose Napoles? Emile Griffith or Jack Britton who all beat the best welterweights of their generation? Have you even heard of these great legends whose memory your stamping on with names like Aaron ****ing Davis, Ike ****ing Quartey and Jose Luis ****ing Lopez?

Do you wonder why everyone laughs at your ridiculous posts? Because these people know a little something about boxing. Its not your game mate, get a new hobby because this one isnt for you.

PS Sorry to deviate from the subject matter this ****** is getting on my nerves.

 

You are a good poster, which makes me wonder if you're pulling my leg on in this thread.Carnera was mildly skilled at best. For openers Carena didn't throw as many punches as Vitail does and he was not very accurate. A quick glance at the films will confirm this. Of if you prefer check the score cards. Vitali was never close to being out boxed. In fact the most anyone every won on him was two consensus rounds. Carnera was out boxed often. In addition Vitali had much better chin, and much better defense in comparison to any big guy Louis fought. Baer couldn't spell jab if you spotted him the " j " and the " a ".

Vitali has mastered the art of using his size and skills to their maxim. He can jab and bomb a guy on the way in, or land, then moved out of the way, and land again, or make his man miss then counter. Few fighters can match Vitali's movement. While Vitali doesn't look like a light weight, Vitlai clearly covers a lot of distance in a hurry and maintains his balance.

In regards to Pastor, Schemeling, Conn, Charles, and Walcott, its obvious that Louis, who's feet were slow and methodical, and who'd guard was low had trouble out boxing these guys. My point is Vitali, who far more size and power then these guys in addition to being a fine boxer would give Louis serious trouble.

 

I am not really trying to boost Carnera, as i havent looked at him for a while and may need to do so in the context of the recent Vitali fights. This also isnt so much a knock on vitali as a challenge to the conclusion that he is skilled just becaue he is fighting in the modern era.

Vitali does not throw all that many punches. My recent watching of Vitali confirms this. And the punches he does throw are always left jab or left hook. They have quite a bit of power, because they are always coming from around the knees or thighs (I wasnt kidding when i said he guards the balls shot) and i dont think anyone disputes this. Usually the left seems to be a one out spot, thouh he does seem to sometimes double up, which Carnera doesnt really do. But this is not often, and i would have thought that Carnera evens this up by throwing more rights. Either way, i am fairly sure from looking at the film that Carnera would throw similar amounts of punches per round to what Vitali does. do you dispute this? If so, it would be great if one of us counted an average round and compared but i admit i am a bit too slack to. Anyone else have punch stats?

I understand this argument of yours. And i think you make it quite well (regularly). In the context of things, it doesnt really matter how "skilled" a fighter is if he wins and Vitali does do this. Ali is the prime example, not text book in many ways but so what. Bob Fitzsimmons is another excellent example. It is highly possible that Carnera was outboxed more often than Vitali because he fought better fighters, although it is also possible that while he was just as skilled, he was not as good. "Skilled" is a difficult term.

It is the defence area that i find interesting. Vitali holds his hands in the wrong position for good defence. In fact he defends much like the 19th century fighters who are often referred to as skill less by many posters. His main defence is actually attack (in the form of a left hand). find your way through the left and he is open for a shot, although he does have quite good evasive skills. Dare i say it, but he would look a likely candidate to the famous Fitzsimmons solar plexus left hook shift.

I agree with the size comment. But then again Carnera used the same advantages, so does Valuev actually. Vitali may be better and/or hit harder than these guys but i dont see what defensive skills he has that they dont. Perhaps better upper body movement and clearly a better left hand.

Yeah but the footwork of these guys are miles ahead of Vitali. Vitalis footwork looks good against the plodders he is facing, but Joe Louis does not plod anywhere near as slowly as the likes of Peter or Areola.

 

well if most people think loius beats klitschko do they think maricano beats him to surely they do .

 

Carnera lacked chin and resistance.............. Carnera was better suited for wrestling rather than boxing.... Carnera cannot be considered amongst the great....... His career stinks with corruption and phony baloney....... Carnera, as a boxer, cannot carry either Klit's jockstrap........

MR.BILL

 

not mention Louis chin!

 

I think Vitali is more durable ,less open to right hands and does hit harder ,though his power is overated imo.I doubt that Vitali has significantly better skills than Carnera ,in fact I think Primo had better, and faster foot work and quicker hand speed,he also strung more than two punches together in a sequence.
And it must be remembered that apart from Lewis, Carnera was facing better opponents,[imo].
Vitali is awkwardly effective,but patently does not like pressure,get inside his comfort zone and he begins to flail his arms,he wont be exposed ,fighting the club fighters he has met ,but someone quick and agile ,who is prepared to take the left lead and get inside it ,will get to him sooner or later.

 

Rahman got lucky with one giant punch. Luck is hard to reproduce. Rahman would win 1 out of 10 fights against the out of shape version of Lewis, 0 against the in-shape version.

The 2003 version of Vitali maybe wins 4-5 out of 10 against the out of shape version of Lewis, maybe 1-2 out of 10 against the super focused, in-shape Rahman II version of Lewis.

 

It should be a given that Vitali is more durable, hits harder, and had far better defense. He also throws more punches, and is much more accurate with his punches. He also fights smarter / has better ring generalship.

Anyone who argues differently hasn't seen much of Carnera, or is playing the hater card on Vitali.

I would not say Primo is faster. Vitali is 38 now, have you seen him before in his mid 20's to low 30's? As for people getting inside Vitali's comfort zone, he has a uppercut and body shots. In Vitali's 40 pro fights, he has pretty much fought ever style and no man was able to consistently take his lead left and inside. Vitali moves around a lot. He's not there to be hit. In fact he makes guys miss, then has countering skills.

What we have here is some ( not you ) fans of Joe Louis comparing the big men of his era to modern big men. There's a huge difference.