I've never heard of him.looking at the link I saw a few inaccuracies immediately . Sonny cutting off the ring for example,he didn't. He is entitled to his opinion but I don't see why his should hold any more gravitas than anyone else's. I didn't go into the ducking of black fighters because that has been extensively debated here and elsewhere.
I cannot believe on a boxing forum I'm hearing the name Joe Louis and overrated in the same sentence.
He keeps harping on John Henry Lewis being a LHW and half blind. Didn't Ali lose to half blind Joe Frazier? Didn't LHW Billy Conn give Louis his hardest fight? Didn't JHL beat Elmer Ray, Al Ettore and numerous other HW contenders? Didn't Louis dispatch him in a single round?
Exactly. I told McGlothlin that very statement but he just ignored it. A fighter's resume is apparently meaningless when it suits his own narrative.
Precisely. This guy has a bug in his britches about Louis, he’s convinced he’s right and he’s not going to listen to anything that deviates from his narrative. Quite honestly, reviewing his list of “charges” … I don’t give six cacas about any of them. But the deal I found … it may of been in his main piece … about Louis “shilling for the military in WWII,” that alone makes his views meaningless. Again shilling for the military in a completely justified and righteous war is an impossibility. Unless he thought we should have sat down at the bargaining table with Cpl. Hitler and Tojo.
One thing I can agree with is that Schmeling deserved his title shot, he was promised he'd get it and he went through a savage beating himself to earn the right to challenge Braddock. But history does not change. Louis and Max had their rematch and we know what happened.
I am. That clown would be embarrassed if he tried pendling his crap on this forum but regular folk on Quora are none the wiser. He throws in links at the end of his posts to give himself an air of authority as if he didn't just bend quotes and events to fit his own personal opinions.
In hindsight it was a good thing that Max did not get that chance at Braddock, which likely would have resulted in him regaining the title. It has nothing to do with Max, who was a good man and led a good life. It has nothing to do with fairness, or right or wrong, or buying the title. It really has nothing to do with boxing in any shape, form or fashion. It has everything to do with what was going on in the world in 1935-37, and I should not have to explain that to anyone who didn’t sleep through history class.
Look, I understand the argument and it does make sense but Jesse Owens didn't have issues competing in the 1936 Olympics and winning gold medals. Hitler had sent Schmeling to New York to reassure the media that no discrimination was taking place in Germany. Of course that was not entirely true but they let black athletes have their share of gold and silver medals in the Olympics. Had Schmeling and Louis arranged a match between 1936 and early 1939 I think things would have worked out as they did in actuality, with Louis beating Max in the early-mid rounds. Sure, Max would have received a heavily biased scoring if it went to a decision but any country would do the same for their fighter (and they did with Sharkey in '32). The problem would arise if Schmeling took his sweet time sitting on the title and 1939 rolled along, Poland would get invaded, the tensions would worsen and the title would have been frozen until 1945 which would essentially tank Louis's legacy.
I’m talking about the strong possibility that Schmeling would have defeated Braddock, and that being a PR coup for the Nazis.
