Joe Louis vs Mike Tyson

I think Joe is somewhat underrated in the foot work department. His footwork was actually quite good and enabled him to get maximum leverage on his punches. His shuffle allowed him to move in any direction while maintaining his power base without expending unnecessary energy. Combie that with his timing, accuracy and deadly power and you have a very dangerous boxer-puncher. By comparison Tyson's footwork is problematic and dependent upon upper body movement to evade punches. Plus that peek-a-boo style requires that your feet are square to your opponent. It's no surprise that we only had 2 champions that used that style of fighting in Tyson and Patterson. It's just a difficult style to learn though effective if you can master it.

 

I disagree that Tyson was off balance more than Louis, and frankly don't see the basis for this claim.. He was floored far less in his prime than Louis was, and the quality of opposition card, isn't being backed up here.. He took Solid shots from Ruddock, Smith, Bruno, and Tucker without going down, and this is supposed to harbor that Louis who was floored by Braddock among others was more stable? You also say that part of the reason for Tyson getting away with being off balance, was due to his agression? If anything, being overly aggressive, creates more instances where a man is going to be caught off balance than anything else.There have been some good points made by you and others in this thread, but I think that we're starting to bend the truth a little here.

 

Another point people don't recognise, is the fact that Tyson is a master boxer. Louis often got outboxed by these types - Conn, Schmelling, Walcott, Charles.

Louis also had problems with crouching pressuring types like MArciano/Goddoy/Farr, ie similar yet inferior fighters to Tyson

Good point about Louis being a slow starter btw, Louis also admitted he never liked being pressured and Tyson would certainly do that

 

I don't think Joe Louis footwork or balance was bad.

Im just saying its the reason, in my opinion, that he #3 of all time, and not #1.

I dont expect people to agree with me on that though.

 

The difference is that Louis actually tried to fight back, whereas Tyson wasn't even giving a half-assed effort...

That would be a whole other thread.

James Douglas was a 6'4", 230 lbs fighter, who had a lengthy jab, good uppercut and halfway decent footwork, and fought in an era where being black wasn't a problem if you wanted a title shot... Schmeling was barely 6'0" tall and weighed 199 lbs, was off for a full year before facing Louis, began his career at lightheavyweight, and had only won 4 of his last 8 fights.. Given these permaters, I think James Douglas would have been a nightmare for a guy like Louis, to a much greater extent than Shmeling ever would have for Tyson..

Given that unless you were managed the way that Louis was back in the 1930's, Smith being a black man probably would have kept him in the unknown section... From that perspective I agree.... Now, remove the politics of the day and place a 6'5", 235 lbs black man with a solid chin and very hard punch in there, you'd have a black version of Max Baer only better....

It's not silly at all.. Braddock was a former light heavyweight, who had lost 25 of his professional bouts, was past his prime and hadn't fought in two years... If a 38 year old Holmes ( who was a natural heavyweight and who's career and past prime fighting ability was far superior to Braddock's ), had managed to deck Tyson in their fight, you guys would be throwing that in everyone's face like it was the one and only deciding factor in picking Louis over Tyson....

 

Although I have all the respect in the world for Louis's abilities as a technical combination puncher, I think that people are going too far in crediting his skills... He was a fighter who generally stood in an upright, stationary position, whereas Tyson was constantly bobbing, weaving and slipping punches... Louis's guard often had holes in it, while Tyson's peak o boo defense proved to serve him better for most of his career, or at least in his prime.... Tyson was good at creating his OWN openings against his foes, but Louis often had to wait for opportunity to come knocking.... I also happen to think that Tyson had greater handspeed, more power and a superior chin...... Frankly, its a no brainer

 

If you actually bothered to look, you'd notice that Tyson's balance was a bit ****.
He had his feet square on, often had his right foot in front of his left, any half decent fight could walk him back in any clinch.

An absolute prime no-excuses Tyson almost falls over at 6:20 against Tubbs, again off-balance at 6:32, and another little stumble at 7:20 :

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q5ioKiR2Gk&feature=related[/ame]


Against Tucker, 0:23, he's leaning in face-first, feet together, Tucker just throws a half-ass uppercut off the backfoot and lifts Tyson in the air :

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEV1SMJvCFU[/ame]

If Tucker wasn't in retreat all the time he might've actually been able to do something.

Against Stewart, Tyson's just crazy off-balance winging in hard shots with his feet in all sorts of unorthodox positions :

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQFOkRTa3-k[/ame]

And these are prime or near-prime Tyson in his first round of his fights, where he supposed to be at his best ...

And I can go on and on, every Tyson fight he leaves his feet in strange positions, puts his right in front of his left like he's fighting southpaw, feet square on and easy to walk back in clinches. Leaning forward open for uppercuts. Almost constantly making those errors.

 

I didn't see very many instances where Tyson was off balance in that footage, except when he was in the middle of a feeding frenzy against Alex stewart and for a split second, slipped to the canvas... Still not the same as getting actually DECKED the way that Louis was regularly... Against Tubbs at the 6:20 mark, it didn't look like anything to me..

 

The Tubbs fight was a masterful performance against a good solid technical fighter which showcased Tysons ability to fight both inside and out. Noone beat Tubbs like Tyson did and you are being very critical in your assessment of a dominating performance. Even Bowe had a tough time figuring Tubbs out. If any half decent fighter could have walked him back and taken advantage of him well then you are calling all his opponents less than half decent?
Tyson was an aggressive fighter, with very underated defensive skills during his best. He hardly got hit cleanly by solid power shots during his brief time at his best. Tyson would often allow himself to get touched by an opponents jab, as one of his main weapons was the counter lefthook off of it.
The Stewart fight was utter ****, just Tyson winging away looking for a KO, hardly comparable to the Tubbs fight.

 

Hey Lefthook, I was just watching that footage of Tyson vs Tubbs, at the 6:20 mark... Frankly, I did not see Tyson off balance at all the way that unforgiven said he was.... How about you, did you see anything?