Who is to say Schmeling was better in 36 than 38? I think he was the same fighter. In 1937 he knocked out contender Harry Thomas, and beat a couple other good trialhorses like Foord. In 1939 a year after losing to louis, schmeling iced Adolph Heuser in one round to win the European HW title.
Thomas was never rated in the top 10. Foord was last rated in January 1937 and when he fought Max in 1938, he lost his last 3 bouts. Losing decsions to Walter Neusel, Tommy Farr and stopped by Max Baer. Adolf Heuser was rated BUT as a Light Heavyweight, not a Heavyweight. The other guy he fought Steve Dudas, was never rated either.
Thomas challenged for Joe Louis heavyweight crown. I would classify that as being a contender, whether he was top 10 or not
Might I sugggest that in this scenario Louis would have declined more quicly due to the increased ringwear. Perhaps the payoff for this hypothetical title reign is that he is too far gone to get past Walcott when he comes knocking. The danger fight here for my money is Lee Q Murray. Louis might have to dodge a bullet in that fight.
Pete Rademacher fought Patterson for the title too. Louis also fought several others that weren't rated at the time he fought them. Guys like Jack Roper, Al McCoy, Gus Dorazio and Tony Musto. I wouldn't call any of them contenders, would you. I have to agree with Mr. Bill somewhat here.
I agree with this completly, Louis would decline so much quicker. Also just pure nitpicking here, I personally wouldnt call Jimmy Bivins a 'defensive counterpuncher'
They were just as good as any era, and Joe fought several times a year and cleaned out the ranks, plus there were a lot of fighting among the ranks to get to a top spot at the time
1. I find it hard to believe that Louis would be allowed to defend against such a number of black challengers. Remember even the first JJW fight was originally scheduled as an exhibition. So unfortunately I think we can forget about half of his defences being against black fighters. 2. After the second Simon fight a return against Conn was next in line for Louis. That fight was planned for june '42, so that would be the first name to pencil in. 3. It's well known that Louis' handlers wanted no part of Bettina as they felt his southpaw style would be a bad matchup for Joe, so they would avoid him as long as possible, if he gets a title shot it's more likely to be in 44-45. 4. Tami Mauriello was top ranked all though the war and as he was of the right complexion I see it as likely that he would be on Joe's dance card. Johnny Flynn beat Maxim sometime during the war so he might also be a likely challenger, as would perhaps Tommy Gomez. 5. I'm a little surprised that you think Baksi would drop Louis. While the bomber hit the canvas now and then I feel it would take a better fighter and harder puncher than Baksi to do the trick. Baksi was big strong and durable all right but he wasn't a real puncher nor for that matter was he a boxer.
A Conn rematch would almost certainly have been the next fight. It was already scheduled to happen for the army/navy releif fund in 1942. Louis might well have been forced to fight some of the top black challengers, simply because they were prevelant in the rankings. Despite the bias in Louis's oponent selection, he never ducked an obvious challenge. On the other hand many of the black contenders post 1942, owed their sucess to the war and the fact that the promotors who had previously rejected them due to their skin colour, were forced to go to them cap in hand. No war might mean a verry different division.
I think a lot of the 40's heavies were smoke and mirrors....... Many overrated and many poorly managed...... Sure, a few were decent, but none of them were truly great.... Joe Louis was clearly the leader of the pack........ I love how either really old guys who heard some fights on the radio but never actually saw these old ringers fight, like to claim how great these dude's were back then.... Same thing for young kids talking like they been there and lived through them golden days / nights like it was yesterday...... C'mon......... Bottom line: Joe Louis' title fights / defenses were not against the sternest crop of heavies to ever lace up the gloves.......... Again, Louis' greatest foe was Joe Walcott when Louis was near the end of the road as champion...... As for assuming what MIGHT'VE been had Louis been active in 1943-1945, what's the point there, he was not active in the ring, but active as an Army Sgt. doing boxing exhibitions for Uncle Sam........ By 1946, Louis clearly had slipped a dab or two......... It happens......... MR.BILL
they were very good fighters, don't be fooled and why just because the 70s hws are the cream, so what, the 70s enjoyed more, much more media exposure - technology... the 40s was the greatest overall period in the sport, these were good fighters. all of them, and in every division too, just getting to the top meant that then, way beyond what it's means even being a champion in the last 30 years
1. "assuming what MIGHT'VE been had Louis been active in 1943-1945, what's the point there" It is fun to speculate. I just don't see much point really in trying to figure out how champions from different eras and different rule sets would do against each other either, but human beings often ask what if questions. I remember an article by no less than Winston Churchill on how history would have been changed if the South won the American Civil War. I have a book in which various military historians speculate on how history would have been changed if the various losing sides had won major battles ranging from Marathon and Tours to Gettysburg and Stalingrad. 2. "By 1946 Louis had clearly slipped a dab or two" There seems to be a consensus that Louis would have gone back faster if he were actively defending his title. I wonder. He might have been hurt more by laying off, which eroded his reflexes. I think it is conceivable he would have been sharper and better preserved in 1946 if he had three or four fights a year. I would point out that Louis rarely took major punishment in fights because of his size, skills, and power. 3. "I think a lot of the 40's heavies were smoke and mirrors." "Many overrated" "a few were decent" "none truly great" "old guys who never saw these ringers fight" So you had to be there to make any historical judgement, I guess. 4. "young kids talking like they been there and lived through them golden days/nights" Like you are talking?