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

When you said "he was a lot more fragile before the lay-off" I thought you meant physically as well. But fair enough.

"A lot more fragile" is overstating it anyway, though. He proved himself to be plenty tough. Crucially he had the mental fortitude to overcome all obstacles. Don't know how much of Louis defeat to Schmeling was down to mentality, but the fact is that he didn't overcome that obstacle.

Ali probably got even tougher when he grew older, and Louis probably did too, but Ali pre-exile would still have the fortitude needed. It's a bigger question mark on Louis' part I'd say. Not that he would fold (he wouldn't), but could he adapt if needed to?

 

Joe Louis on what he'd do...

Ali never fought a boxer-puncher with Louis' combination of speed, power, and smarts... Nobody on the level of Louis as far as ring IQ goes period, really. Louis' ability to block and counter a jab is a natural foil to Ali's greatest strength IMO(something we see in the Norton fights).

You're talking about a Joe Louis who had taken off time during his prime for the war(and commentators saw the difference in him and Conn in their rematch)and held the championship for 10 years? Not to mention that Louis is 7 years older than the one in the title of this topic. Walcott's style is no doubt a foil for Louis..But not because he was a quick speedy boxer...because of his counterpunching ability. His skill at making opponents lead(negating Louis' drawing ability)...Same with Charles. Louis never had issues with the big guys...the smaller, smarter boxers gave him some trouble... like Conn for example. But Ali was not as technically sound as these guys and I think Louis would exploit that.

Pretty confused. Louis destroyed Schmeling in a rematch....Same with every fighter he faced. Louis was better at adapting and figuring a fighter out over a series of fights than any boxer ever(he never had competitive fight series in his prime). Louis is fantastic at adapting.

 

Personal pride would be such a large factor. Two of the proudest champions ever.

Two of the most talented champions ever.

Two of the most successful champions ever.

Two of the most polar-opposite champions ever.

Ali would be masterful, but in danger every minute of the fight.

Louis would be patient, stoic and ruthless.

But he wouldn't catch Ali.

Ali takes it, on the cards or possibly even stoppage.

 

You yourself used Norton as an example. Be consistent.

Between fights. Not during them.

 

I tend a bit towards Ali.

Louis might outpoint Ali if Joe fights the more perfect fight, which is possible.

Louis might KO Ali if he catches Ali with something that takes Ali's legs away temporarily, particularly if this happens in the second half of the fight.

 

How would the Louis of the 2nd Schmeling fight in June 1938 compare to Ali in 1967???

 

Of course not, that would be ******ed.

I maybe wrong but when I see Ali post-layoff he seems to be more determined, he seems to want it more, he seems to want to prove something. And IMO this will, mental strength is the most important factor in the ring when both fighters are as good prepared as they can be.

Ali was always tough, pre and post layoff. But he was tougher post layoff. Or at least he proved himself more in that regard. I don´t know how deep Ali could dig in his younger years because he never had to but we know that he could dig very deep post layoff - perhaps deeper than any other hw champ ever. I think taking a stand and the pressure during the layoff made Ali much tougher, stronger and determined mentally. He wanted to show all the people that no matter how many obstacles they lay in his way, he will become champ again, that he will achieve greatness.

So, back to Louis. I think pre-layoff Ali loses to him because he lacks the mental toughness of Louis´ pressure and that his combinations would hurt him. He can´t stay away for 15 rounds. Post-layoff Ali would stand too much right in front of Louis and get hit too much to win. Imagine it would have been Louis instead of Frazier in ´71. Do you think Ali would still have stood after 15? I don´t.

 

I don't really consider Ali to have been shot or past in 1973 or anything, and my post wasn't "If Norton could outbox a past prime Ali then Louis could", it was "Ali was frazzled by a fighter who could parry and counterjab and Louis was very good at this".

Louis was pretty good at adapting in fights(better than really any heavy i can think of besides Ali himself). By his own admission he waited patiently for a single type of mistake in the Conn fight and took advantage. You rarely see him panic in a fight either. He waits for his opportunity and strikes how he knows best. At times certain fighters gave him trouble the first time around... But the point is, i'd favor him in a trilogy over anyone. That includes Ali.

 

If little Billy Conn could outbox Joe for 13 rounds, think of what Ali could do. I know we're talking primes here, but even still I think Ali would out-slick Louis, by decision. I'd love to see Louis knock him out, though.

 

I don´t think so, see above why. Pre-exile Ali was tough but not tough enough to hang in with Joe Louis at his best. I don´t think any fighter was though.

Louis´ loss to Schmeling didn´t have much to do with mentality. That was just Schmeling´s night. I don´t think he was quite at the level of "Toledo-Dempsey" or "FotC-Frazier" but that was his night.

 

Norton having the success he had was largely down to Ali not having the same legs. Just as Walcott's success against Louis had much to do with Louis having slowed down.

If you're going to use the one, you have to be open for use of the other. Otherwise you're inconsistent.

He didn't adapt during the first fight against Schmeling, nor against Conn. He didn't win because he changed gameplan, but because Conn did.

This is about a single fight, though, not a trilogy. In a single fight, Ali's superior ability to adapt during the fight is an advantage for him.

 

Conn didn´t outbox Joe Louis though. He was in ther in the trenches with him. It was not like he did something different in the 13th to the other 12 rounds before. The time was just up. Nobody does what Conn did for 15 rounds with Joe Louis. Quite an achievement that he lasted 13 rounds, that really showed how good Conn was.

 

But you don't really base this on anything. The fact is that Ali overcame a psychologically (and overall) far more difficult obstacle in Liston than Louis ever did. Hence, even pre-exile Ali is more proven in this respect than Louis.

 

I am truly baffled that you have come to this conclusion. Ali was in general much better prepared and much more focussed pre-exile than post-exile.

Look at Ali against Mathis, MacFoster, Norton I, Patterson II, Foster, Lyle etc, etc. Ali never ever looked that disinterested before the lay-off.

Actually, according to Dundee he wasn't even preparing for FOTC like he should. Mailer also noted that he liked to round off training with girls and champagne ahead of FOTC.

He allowed himself no such distractions in training before the exile.

 

I base this that during Louis´ prime nobody could hang in there with him with the exception of one fighter who had the luck to have his best night ever and finding a technical flaw in Louis game at the same time. Yeah, Ali overcame obstacles in the Liston fight but only because of Dundee, he wanted to quit didn´t he?