"Joe Louis of '40 vs. Muhammad Ali of '67" in a time machine/fantasy bout. Who wins?

The question is, can Ali stay away from Louis for 15 rounds? I say he can´t.

 

I don´t think he has. Ali was a lot more fragile pre-lay off than post lay-off IMO. He was tougher and mentally stronger post lay-off a nd IMO that made him a better fighter despite having lost some footspeed.

 

They ain´t no Joe Louis when it comes to landing combinations. If Louis is able to land some solid combinations Ali is getting stopped, not necessarily KOed though. And I think Louis at his best can do so.

 

Consesually the two greatest heavyweights ever. The only real debate being who comes first on the list. I,like many of us,have given our views,at length,as to who we think would win. Suffice to say,Ali's greater adaptability in the midst of a battle with switching fortune,would carry him through. Ali by late round tko. Both men would be on the canvas at some point.

 

Louis would knock him out his technique was too perfect too good i could watch him all day and all this bull**** people spout about ali wouldnt get hit etc is rubbish is chuvalo could hit ali im sure as hell louis would hit him multiple times and a ko within 10.

 

I definitely agree that Louis was an incredible fighter,Alex :good As I said,the second greatest heavyweight ever

 

I think Ali's reflexes provide a good defense for Louis' brand of counterpunching. Louis' lack of footspeed would hurt him as well. If anyone could survive being hurt by Louis, it would be Ali. His toughness, mental strength and survival skills are a matter of record.

Tight match for the first 8 rounds, though Louis trails slightly on the scorecards as the right hand leads slow him down. Ali dominates the latter half of the fight.

Part of Louis' greatness was his consistency. Best for best, par for par, I'd consider the best Ali slightly above the best Louis H2H. Added to that, I see a styles matchup that favors Ali.

 

I see the myth of Louis´ slow feet is still around.

 

Come on Bill - you're not going to even tell me that George Chuvalo could hit 10% as hard as Joe Louis?? I agree with your words to some degree but George Chuvalo??!! :huh - just coming to the end of my dinner break at work so I'll have to give a bit more input on this later after work and gym - catch yer later :hi:

 

If old and worn Zora Folley could hit Muhammad Ali with those free shots in
Rounds 1 and 2 and 3.....

Ali was not unhittable, it was just that all those guys from 64' thru 67' were old,
slow or worn-out.
The 1963' guys, Doug Jones and Henry Cooper, proved that a little quickness
could baffle him.

Joe may be out-sped early, but eventually his hard punches would take their toll on a fleeting Ali.

 

To say Ali was better post-exile is nonsense. He says so himself (as does Dundee, the opponents who faced him both pre- and post-exile etc, etc).

Ali/Clay was always tough. He got off the floor against Banks and Cooper to finish them off. He pulled himself together after being rocked by Jones. He went out blind in the fifth round against Liston. You like to point to the difficulties he had against Banks, Jones and Cooper, yet you ignore the resilience he showed in actually winning these fights. Smells of biased reasoning.

And all this humbug about Ali being physically stronger and more solid in the 70's... Against Frazier, Norton and Foreman he was around 212-215; more or less the same as in 1967. In fact, you can find an interview on Youtube when Ali himself scoff at the notion that he was physically tougher and stronger against Foreman than against Liston.

On the other hand Cooper was amazed of how Ali's strength had improved between '63 and '66. So evidently, these were the years where he really matured physically.

If you have Louis as the winner, fine. But at least get your facts straight.