Evander Holyfield: I'd tear Joe Louis Up

ones in boxing boots the others in heels which was the style back then. Foremans bigger than Louis its not an argument

 

Shortly after your clip ends, the camera pans out and reveals that Louis was wearing boots with heels.

 

There would be a big difference both barefoot

 

Yes. I SAW all his fights. Louis knocked out, 10-100 count, a lot of guys never KOd. Holyfield would stand and trade and be KOd early. Also by Dempsey, first Forem an. I could see by MARCIANO and Frazier in 4 or 5. Holy was no great puncher or defensive great. He liked to fight and could be hurt. Hardly anyone went to his body. These guys would. HARD. Then upstairs for the KO. Holyfield was an exciting fighter but never in the upper echelon of Heavyweight Greats.

 

Which is why I said "looks like," as in "appears to be."
Foreman is bigger than Louis, but barely.
Not a class bigger, like the conversations of size here may have you believe.

The point is, compared to Evander, Louis wouldn't really be small at all.

 

I could see Liston taking Evander out early also

 

[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2016/02/18/lets-all-appreciate-how-fast-jesse-owens/80523426/[/url]
read this article until the end. Owens would be one stride behind Bolt if he were to race today.

 

So taking Evander's stats at face value to argue he's as big as Louis is rubbish. Thank you, that was my point.

 

The talent level is so low in USA Amateurs these days, it would be a sure thing.

But I think Holyfield has the right type of style and stuff to give Louis a very tough fight, and I would not rule out an upset. Holy boxes men his size very well, it a top counter puncher, better on defense, and take a better punch

Louis might need a stoppage here.

 

Exactly, so Evander Holyfield's stats are BS. His reach is not equal to Foremans.

 

How about we start with being a vastly better counterpuncher and inside fighting... and we know there is more....

 

That article is extremely flimsy.

Firstly, Bolt's best time is a 9.58 not a 9.77. Secondly, the inference that modern timing improves the recorded performance is ludicrous. Full Auto Times in the 100 meters have a general conversion factor of +.24 seconds, that is they add an additional quarter second to the time. Thus a 10.3 HT is generally considered worth a 10.5 FAT, not a 10.1. This is not always the actual case as hand-times are inherently variable but the generally accepted conversion.

I've competed on everything from dirt to cinder to Mondo tracks used in D1 NCAA meets and Oly Trials. No variation of those surfaces gave me a 1 second advantage in the 100. Dirt tracks can be very fast if they are well made, well groomed and in good weather. Bob Hayes ran a 10.06 FAT on Tokyo's dirt track, which wasn't at all well-groomed as his lane (1) had been beaten up by the distance events. Synthetic tracks are very consistent and immune to weather variations. They require far less upkeep and the lines stay painted between meets. That was the main reason for their introduction.

If the article really wanted to bolster Owens (who was a great sprinter) it should have mentioned that he essentially retired at 22, as was something of the norm in those days. Given a few more years, he probably would have gone faster, just buy the probability that he hit an ideal wind day on a fast track, if not that he actually increased his speed. Many "modern" (read into that what you may) sprinters peak in their latter 20's if not beyond... eh-hem.

 

I agree.

 

The massive elephant in the room though is the modern enhancements availiable to current athletes.

 

Huh? Louis was not a better counter puncher than Holyfield, and frankly, it's not all that close. Louis main style was to plod forward behind a jab to set up this punches. He wasn't on his toes moving around, using angles and counter punching off said angles. That is what Holyfield, and yes, he was vastly better at it. Inside fighting, again, not the same level. Look at the movement Holyfield is exhibiting in the pocket. Head movement, torso movement, combination punching in the pocket (all punches and various angles) No, that wasn't something Louis did all the time, nor was he better at Holyfield when it comes to such inside fighting. Which fights are you thinking of, where Louis displayed superior infighting skills to Holyfield. Please let me know so I can watch them again for something I must've missed