Joe Louis was serious.

Again, dummy. The point is irrelevant. It applies to all weight divisions. The point is that size of course plays a point.... to a part. You are hypothetically pitting smaller, more skilled opponents versus tall, mostly fat, unskilled lumbering giants. Marciano would slaughter pretty much everyone in the top ten. that's the gulf in class.

Dempsey lost to Tunney because Tunney was a ****ing good fighter, you ****. He beat the P4P ATG #3 of all time, Greb, 5/6 times. He wasn't a bad fighter. He was a great fighter. And that was a 30+ year old Dempsey. After 70+ pro fights you might think that was a somewhat shopworn version of the guy, right.

Don't call me names when you don't know anything about the sport or fighters of the time period you're questioning. shut your mouth, go read up and watch some fights, and then get back to me when you have a clue. Because right now you have 0 argument besides today's HW athletes are bigger. Well no ****ing ****.

 

Boxing if anything has DEvolved. The heavyweights are all fat slobs apart from the champs and povetkin. There are less kids boxing, less trainers, less frequent fights both amateur and pro. The amateur scoring is balls, Fighters fight less rounds and aren't as fit...I could go on. If by evolve you mean we have better nutritional knowledge and products and todays fighters are bigger I agree with you, but that doesn't mean they're better fighters. Trainers are less knowledgable nowadays, and many techniques aren't used anymore. I never see a parry or shoulder roll (apart from floyd) nowadays. Hell even subtle slipping is going out the window. Most boxers today just block in a handcuffed position. Not only are you getting hurt because some punches can force their way through your guard, but you also blind yourself.

As for Louis having no footwork or defence, I think you should look closer. He had very good footwork. Everytime he threw punches he had perfect balance and got the right leverage because his feet were planted correctly. I'm guessing you only consider FAST footwork as good like Ali or Leonard. And defence? Look at his subtle slipping and feinting, and the way he counters effectively. He'll step back after a combo and when his opponent comes in BANG! Klits would certainly have been knocked out by this guy. Oh and don't try to throw up the fact he was 205 lbs and too small because he knocked out a 6"7 250lb Baer in one round, a 6"6 280lbs Carnerra and a 6"4 240lbs Simon. Weight and size doesn't always determine punching power. If that were true Muhammad Ali hit harder than Joe Frazier, and Leonard hit harder than Hearns.

 

^haha, leave it to a guy with a single post to know his **** better than the majority of ESB vets in this topic. :thumbsup

 

I don't really give a **** if you agree or not.

 

Yeah, talk about stupidity. Haye would get out-classed by Louis. Louis is on another level.

 

You are so obscenely stupid that it boggles the mind. I never said Tunney was a bad fighter. He was a very good fighter. My point, moron from another planet, was that Dempsey was not on another plane of existence, he did not possess skills that are beyond the reach of the modern heavyweight. You are trapped, like a mosquito in amber, in the past...holding desperately to this idea of the old great athlete, that they possessed superior skills. Okay, maybe they were slightly more skilled than the current crop, but the size and strength discrepancies, in my opinion, would be too much for them to overcome.

 

Nothing worse than reverse snobbery to nostalgia. Can't even have a reasonable discussion with a lot of these people.

 

Joe Louis only had 50 amateur bouts.

 

No. Louis ot ktfo by Schmelling who isnt a great boxer nor hits as hard as Haye. Haye is faster, bigger, stronger and looking at the videos, probably more skilled.

 

Questioning Louis "as-he-was" against the Klitschkos "as-they-are" with their size, styles, and modern training methods is one thing.

Louis would, however, have no problem disposing of Haye as-is inside 6 rounds. That is an absolute certainty.

 

I always post these videos when Louis is mentined
Part 1

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

Part 2

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ffr72V38isY&feature=related[/ame]

This content is protected

He uses slow motion in these highlights which is incredible because you see the technique and style of Louis to perfection

This content is protected

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sv1ph-Ecf0&playnext=1&videos=pXnSRL6i06g&feature=rec-LGOUT-exp_fresh%2Bdiv-1r-7-HM



.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7gZRlYyAUo&feature=related[/ame]

 

He slipped punches and countered. You threw, you miss, he threw, he made you pay. He also used his legs to help out. You move enough to where the punch misses and you can get back into position quickly to counter. Fighters can even be caught reaching and then BAM!

You shouldn't pay much attention to the many fighters today that stick up their hands and block punches most of the time and think that is brilliant defense.

 

Oh yes, the old faithful "you don't know **** about boxing" insult and argument atsch :good

And You obviously did not watch the Lewis/Holy fights kid, the 2nd one was closer but CLEAR for Lewis! The first one IS one of the worst robberies in the history of the sport....and it was scored a draw that is saying something about how clearly Lewis beat him in that fight :deal And I don't know **** about boxing? :nut

 

Haye shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as Louis, you obviuosly know very little about boxing.