Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

Louis would make mincemeat out of him, in all probability.

 

Well okay, but what does this really prove, if anything? I'll concede that Vitali lost less rounds to ranked opponents, if that's what you're after.

Then again, Evander Holyfield usually lost more rounds than Mike Tyson to the same or similar opposition too, and look how that turned eventually out.

Ultimately, 'less rounds lost' doesn't really mean a great deal to me.

 

You nailed it!
Vitali's best opponents are.
Vaughn Bean,who never beat a top heavy.
Larry Donald ditto,who beat a 40 year old Witherspoon,and who else?
Oh yes ,a 44 year old Holyfield.
Kirk Johnson who was 30 lbs overweight,and also never beat a top heavy.
Carlos Gomez a 36 year old former cruiser who was 40lbs over his best weight.
Sam Peter the crude clubbing Nigerian ,who lost to a 39 year old fat former middle weight.
Chris Arreola an untried and untested club fighter,
.Vitali Klitschko has faced ONE great fighter ,and he was stopped.

Of such stuff legends are made.JIM JEFFRIES LIVES ,and speaks RUSSIAN.:good

Joe Louis had 69 fights and lost 3 of them ,the first when he fooled around in training,and the other 2 when he was clearly past his prime and no longer the Brown Bomber.
Champ for 12 years with multiple defences.
We are now asked to beleive that this reluctant Ivan Drago beats him?
I dont buy it.:-(

 

Yeah, but that's why he's stepping it up in his next fight and taking on a much better class of opponent.
Kevin Johnson.
:rofl

 

Pound for pound seems to have a lot to do with being the best at your weight, and moving up in weight and taking multiple belts in other divisions. Such an avenue is not open to heavyweights as there is not division left for them to conquer once they win the top spot.

I hoped this would be a Louis 30's and 40's thread vs Vitali 90's and 00's thread. You are changing the rules perhaps because there is not a counter point to what I am saying. That is, Louis had major issues with good boxer / mover types, while Vitali did not.

I'll go with the switch here to illustrate my point

If you must use the 70's, 80's and 90's, take the champions and insert Vitail's name vs their opposition.

I have seen Ali lose way too many rounds vs Jimmy Young and Ron Lyle....I don't think Vitali would lose as many. Frazier was good in 1971, but seemed to lose steam as decade matured.

As for the 80's, I don't think Vitali would have trouble with most of Holmes opponents including Norton and Witherpsoon. I think Vitali beats these guys by a wider margin than Holmes did. I think VK breezes through Mike Spinks unlike Holmes. I also think Vitali would defeat the same guys Tyson did, though it might take him a while longer to do it.

The 90's is loaded with talent. I'd have to think about that one for a while, but Vitali did fight Lewis, who was likely the best out there in the 90's and was up 4-2 on all three score cards.

Never the less the data is the data, and Vitali seems to tower over everyone on the score cards. Even over the prime Ali who lost more rounds to the likes of Henry Cooper, Zora Folley and Doug Jones than Vitali has in his entire pro career.

 

I happen to think Vitlai's bum of the month tour is better than Louis. Compare and contrast the ring records between the two if you dare. Have you see who was ranked #2 while Louis was champ? Guys like Galento who lost oh 20 more times than Peter did.

If you think Louis is better, I fine with that, but the thing I never liked on boxing is double standards to make one fighter look better than the other. If you think Vitali opposition stinks, I'll say he smashes them. What's Louis excuse for losing over a dozen rounds and getting floored vs. his bum of the month guys?

 

Dont forget that Johnson has beaten the mighty Bruce Seldon who was only 41 at the time.Who can forget Seldon's gallant challenge against Tyson? Unfortunately none of us .
Fighting unproven and untested guys like this devalues the title to a shameful extent.Surely Eddie Chambers would not pass up a title shot?
I like Vitali ,he is allways in shape conducts himself well and is an intelligent man ,respectful to his opponents , but he is awkwadly effective rather than great, and the only fight I have seen him in that was other than moderately entertaining was against Lewis,and he lost that one.
" The data is the data". Well, now we know.atsch

 

It's true, during Louis's reign there were some crappy heavyweights getting high ratings. The were weak periods in Joe Louis's 11 year reign, in fact for much of it. But he took on most of the top guys too, and eliminated many before he was even champion. And his claim was undisputed.

If Klitschko fights Klitschko we can start comparing one of them to these former champions.

It happens in boxing.
Louis kept winning for years and years as undisputed champion. Even if his opposition stinks I'd say that it's a more meaningful feat to win many fights as undisputed champion for many years, than just winning rounds as a non-champion or alphabet champion for a few years.

 

Hmmm...ok, the idiot comment was out of line.

Carnera had nothing like Vitali's reflexes, he was always easy to hit. He was a circus strongman, that's how he was discovered. Vitali is extremely difficult to hit and punches from weird angles. He is a very difficult fighter to train for. And no, I don't see similarities other than height between the two. Vitali's jab/half uppercut, his way of making opponents miss and counter...no, I don't see that in Carnera.

 

I'm not changing the rules. It was you who said the following:
"In fact Vitali's rounds won to rounds lost ratio might be the best in comparison to ATG's in any weight class."

That's why I asked you about Robinson. You first brought up the issue of fighters from other weight classes, not me.

Well, what you're saying in regards to the above is specualtion, but it's not out of the realms of possibility. Fair enough.

I have conceded already that Vitali has done better, in terms of 'less rounds lost', than Louis. Perhaps better than maybe any other heavyweight.
But again...so what? Refer to my Holyfield/Tyson argument above.

Louis also had one less loss than Vitali after the same amount of fights. You can't argue with the data.

 

I think Vitali would lose numerous fights in the 70's, let alone rounds.

 

Is Vitali really fighting Kevin Johnson next?

 

Tentatively scheduled for December.

 

God help us all...

 

I don't really see what's bad about that? He's fought three top5 contenders in a year's time now. He could just as well have fought the Sedric Field's of the world after beating Peter, but instead he's taking on all comers, ranked opposition and fighting very frequently for a 38 year old.