Who has better resume; Joe Louis or Muhammad Ali?

The term was "obliterated", and I don't think that fits any of those fight. And the reports from the Farr fight didn't having beat Farr with ease.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=t5sFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5034,6462978&hl=en

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=jmoFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3685,4466808&hl=en

Louis was a beast in rematches, though.

 

Ali and Louis are clearly the two best ever at heavyweight. But I see Ali as better because he beat better competition and feel that he was better head to head. Frazier, Foreman, and Liston were superior to anyone that Joe Louis defeated. Joe also suffered the KO loss to Schmeling. And while Billy Conn was a great fighter, he was a light heavyweight who lacked a punch in that weight class, yet badly wobbled Louis during their first fight. When compared to Ali, I’m afraid that Joe will have to settle for second best.

 

Could say the same about Tex Cobb. He probably wasn't as good as McCall lol.

 

As I said, Louis was still improving, but I think he had "hit his stride" in essence. Like Ali against Liston, about. And Louis in 1939 would do better, partly because he knew better how to fight Schmeling after the experience of the first fight.

Louis was dominant in his prime, more dominant than 70's Ali, but that he obliterated all his opponents while 70's Ali pulled his wins out is not a fair reflection. He obliterated most of his opponents and Ali had to pull some wins put, against the very best comp, until he got really past his prime.

And this is comparing a prime Louis with a past prime Ali.

That Ali would slow against a Patterson that he was tattooing with punches even befre the injury... Nothing is impossible, but considering Ali's engine at the time (the 15 he did against Chuvalo was after a 17 day camp, and even then he didn't show much slowing) and that Patterson would get more and more worn down by taking that punishment, I think it highly unlikely that he would do so to a degree that would in any shape or form lead to a different result. Maybe he'd pull his punches less than he seemed to do in and the end would have come at about the same time anyhow.

 

I think "excellent timing" is overdoing it a bit here. Some were getting on a bit in years (as was for example Schmeling in the rematch), but only Williams was far removed from his best imo.

 

I know I asked you this before but don't think I got an answer: Do you dismiss the result of every fight where there's been a confirmed injury? For example Tyson-Tucker, Floyd-Pac and Pac-Bradley 2? Loma-Lopez, Lopez-Kambosas? Ali's documented hand problems through his second career, do they mean that Frazier's and Norton's wins over him are to be dismissed?

Personally, I do it see it that black and white. Knowing that injuries are part of the game and fighters often carry some sort of problem I want a clear indication in the fight that an injury played a part in the result.

Liston wings that left freely as long as the fight lasts. It's not like Cerdan against LaMotta where he's clearly one-armed but still arguably more competitive.

Patterson had long time back issues, I think, so it wasn't a matter of timing. Dundee suggested that his problems was aggravated against Ali since his blows landed on a crouching Patterson's forehead and transplanted the force through his back, and that that had happened to several of Ali's sparring partners.

Make of that what you will, since Dundee hardly is a neutral party here, but crucial for me is that Patterson was dominated for five rounds before the injury happened. It wasn't a competitive fight that turned on that injury.

Terrell's injury is a weird one, yes, and hard to know how it happened or when. But that was also a fight that never changed in character, but looked pretty much the same for all the 15 rds.

EDIT: It does seem there was an incident in rd 4. This is what I wrote about some years ago after reviewing the film:

"I think the thumb that seemed to happen in rd 4 quite likely worsened the injury to Ernie's eye to some degree. It is swelling fast in the corner after the round. But it's hard to know just what difference the possible thumbing made. Ali was after all constantly landing clean blows to the eye as well."

 

Ali was lucky Terrell got injured. He wouldn’t have stood a chance otherwise! /s

 

Dismissed as irrelevant for the resume. Because that seems to be how you see them when you have mentioned those Ali fights in this thread and other.

 

Vitaly was well ahead against Byrd and didn't seem to be in much distress. Liston wasn't behind, but tiring rapidly and getting hit with just about everything Ali threw. He looked close to done. So I wouldn't equal them.

As for Patterson, it would have been preferable with no injury of course, but looking at the injury free rounds Floyd had to pull something dramatic out of the bag to change the course of the fight.

The Terrell fight is a weird one. Fighters usually reacts in a very clear fashion to eye pokes (I do as well when sparring), but nothing like that from Terrell from what I can recall so if it was a singular trauma like that it's very hard to know when it happened. There's no real change in Terrell or the fight at any point. The first is a bit of a feel out round for Ali, as he often started, but then he takes over and rarely let's up.

 

It's Ali for me and not really that close honestly. Ali's career is like Louis' career if Louis came back, beat Marciano, and remained at the top of the division for another several years

 

For the time and place they were fought, Ali does, but Louis' p4p names are actually incredible. If there was no Joe Louis, and you saw Bivins, Walcot x2, Conn x2, John Henry Lewis, Schmeling, and the dude who did Take This Job and Shove It, you'd be like whoa. Look at dat resume. I'd tap dat resume azz.

 

If Terrell was injured prior to the bout, you'd have an argument. But Terrell was injured during the bout because of a punch. It's essentially the same as asking, would the fight have been different if Terrell didn't get hit.

 

You're clearly having trouble grasping my point. Because of Louis's numerous knockdowns, it's silly to say he stood head and shoulders above his opponents to a degree Ali didn't.

I'm not comparing Ali to Louis's opponents. I'm comparing Ali's opponents to Louis's opponents which is exactly the point of the thread. At the end of the day Ali's opponents were much better than Louis's regardless of the manner he beat them. He beat imo three top ten fighters and 4 top 20 fighters. Louis beat 0 top ten fighters and maybe 2 fighters in the top 20.

 

Excellent post.