Joe Louis vs David Tua

Def not that’s probably why I used Rahman as a better example although those two are different as well. But both were rather stationary fighters with good balance and fundamentals and occasionally chinny. Louis was just faster and a much better combination thrower with equal power.

 

Not because he could not land always with his full power because he was not as good overall but when he did the showed that he had huge power

 

This should be the go-to description of David Tua.

 

Yeah sure, Ali and Louis had the super hero coat, as well as the "greatness" tattoo. Thats why both would be equaly favored against a non-ATG boxer.
Why does the Tyson-Tua-thread go tons of pages, when we could easily stop it at this point?
Again: Why are you guys playing dumb again?

 

Tua's biggest problems always seemed psychological to me. He was a good looking fighter when he was motivated and aggressive, but he too often just seemed to go through the motions.

 

So actual accomplishements are meaningless? All that matters is how much you like a fighter?

 

Then neither did the vast majority of fighters Louis defended against. Which makes his record a bit of a joke, no?

 

Fight is fought in a phone booth, both fighters locking horns and taking turns to trade shots. Louis catches Tua with a lot more crisp eye catching combinations while Tua tries to bob and weave behind a cross arm defence keeping busy with a few shoe shine punches then exploding with left hooks. So long as Louis doesn't get sloppy I think he gets the better of these exchanges.

On the outside Louis keeps Tua at bay with his jab, occasionally catching him with an overhand right. Tua begins to retreat into a shell and becomes increasingly flat-footed and passive. Louis on points (he doesn't KO Tua).

 

Tua was much better puncher overall than rahman more explosive and faster not the same

 

Why are you equalising Ali and Louis? What do they have in common next to two arms and legs?
What matters more than anything is abilities and style! And yes, the value of abilities and style are shown in accomplishements.

Yet, I´m waiting who of the Louis gang would go 38-3, never hurt, 86% Ko-ratio in the 90s. Thats Tuas H2H stats. Thats what counts too. Then we can check if Louis fought comparable guys. If not, we at least might check which fights Louis got away from his opponent best, mostly boxing, not trading too much. Because this is the best way to beat Tua.

And I´m saying this regardless of any ATG tattoos, wonderland coats or Bert Sugar awards: Good rangy moving jabbers like Young, Bugner, Thomas, Tubbs, Tucker etc. would trouble Tua. The more durable, the better.

 

If a fighter is good enough to dominate Max Schmeling as you claim, then you would at least expect him to be beating men like Byrd and Rahman.

 

Well not really, because he could only fight who was available.

 

Schmeling lost to crude Baer and rumbled it out with a middleweight. He had one good fight with Louis, next to showing nothing in the rematch. He´d not fight at HW in the 90s, he´d compete at cruiserweight.
But he is not to debate here.

 

Crude Baer was a lineal heavyweight champion, and Schmeling gave him a competitive fight.

Baer was better than anybody Tua beat.

Schmeling beat a whole heap of contenders other than Louis.

He sure as hell beat a lot more ranked contenders than Tua.

He might have had a career at both cruiser and heavy in the 90s.

Either way, the best cruiserweigths probably beat Tua.

 

Best ever? I agree, although I'd only pick 2 to do it. Usyk and Holyfield.

Gomez was the man in the 90s, but I doubt he'd have beaten Tua. He's also my #3 CW, and still.