Could Louis go through Holmes championship opposition undefeated

None of this post addresses what I posted.

My position is Ali and Holmes didn’t possess the raw individual punching power of Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. Do you disagree?

 

This is just semantics. They had power but not RAW power.

Norton went 54 rounds with two guys who stopped practically all the big names, even the RAW POWER KO guys.

Ali, particularly, stopped more names and better fighters than the RAW power guys did. Joe Louis included.

But Ali and Holmes couldn't, floor, wobble, or even dominate Norton, no matter how many punches they hit him with. He fought them on even terms or better. In fact, Norton broke Ali's jaw, it wasn't the other way around.

I stand by my statement that 1937 Louis, who wasn't yet at his best, would've had a hard time getting past the 1978 Norton who Holmes faced.

That's it.

For me, it's not simply one guy hits hard, one guy is chinny, move on.

Although, for some, it apparently is.

 

It isn't semantics at all. I think that Foreman, Shavers and Cooney all hit significantly harder than Ali and Holmes. Do you disagree?

 

It's the wrong question. What does who hits harder between Holmes and Cooney have to do with who wins a Louis-Norton fight?

It's not like the chin of Joe Louis never betrayed him. Did Joe Louis ever break anyone's jaw who was the stature of Ali?

Who's to say Ken Norton doesn't uncork an overhand right on Joe Louis like he hit Duane Bobick with and Louis goes right down to the floor?

You've taken a fight between Louis and Norton and now want to decide the winner by who hit harder, Cooney or Holmes?

Who gives a crap? Holmes knocked out Cooney and dropped him multiple times. Clearly, Holmes' power proved better in terms of winning their actual fight than Cooney and his raw power did.

You're just going back to the fighter in the boxes argument. Louis hits hard. Norton is chinny. You ignore that Louis was bothered by guys who had good jabs, even if they were glorified middleweights, and Norton had an amazing power jab. You ignore that Joe Louis wasn't known to have the best chin, yet somehow avoids the "chinny" label that are stamped on others.

If Joe Louis broke Ali's jaw and beat him, and Ken Norton got smacked around and was wobbling all over the place by Billy Conn, this discussion would've ended on page one.

 

Of course the question is relevant to the discussion.

JT cited Foreman, Shavers and Cooney's stoppages of Norton as evidence he doesn't have a good record of surving fighters with elite power. You countered that he survived Ali and Holmes. So, asking whether you consider that Ali and Holmes punched as hard as Foreman, Shavers and Cooney is absolutely material to the discussion.

Why are you afraid to answer the question? Again, do you think Ali and Holmes hit as hard as Foreman, Shavers and Cooney?

 

What's this "afraid" crap? I'm sitting in a comfortable chair talking to some guy online. I'm not afraid of anything. It's the wrong question.

Shavers and Cooney hit harder than Holmes. And they both got knocked out by Larry's power. Foreman hit harder than Ali. And Foreman got knocked out by Ali's power.

And that proves ... what? That you can have more raw power and you still lose. Great argument.

It comes down to how the fighters match up. Like I keep saying. Stylistically, Norton in 1978 poses all kinds of problems for 1937 Joe Louis, who wasn't at his best yet.

Because Norton was still on top of his game against Larry. Norton wasn't considered chinny when he was on top.

Hell, he was favored to beat Shavers, who was known for his power, in 1979, because Norton being "chinny" wasn't a question going in ... even 46 fights and 12 years into his pro career.

Only after he lost did everyone start in.

But you guys just insist on just putting guys in boxes and looking at nothing else. You have blinders on.

 

Thank you, we're getting somewhere, albeit slowly.

You acknowledge that Foreman, Shavers and Cooney hit harder than Ali and Holmes. Below is why that's relevant to this discussion:

I completely agree that there HWs who are elusive and/or have very good chins, but worse durability, that could survive Shavers, Cooney and even Foreman, yet would be stopped by Ali and Holmes.

Clearly, Norton isn't one of those HWs. That’s because he had insane, off the charts durability, whilst having a worse chin.

Norton, as a come forwards pressure fighter with insanely good durability, but a worse chin, is more vulnerable to huge punchers, than he is vs more skilled punchers who have a better work rate, but less power. As evidenced by his career.

P.s. I'm looking forward to Wilder vs Chisora. Unlike with hypothetical discussions, we'll soon find out, definitively, which of us is right.

 

It's all about the chin, with you guys, when it comes to Norton.

Because you insist on putting fighters in those boxes.

What about Joe's chin? Why no discussion of that?

If Ken could break Ali's jaw, he could certainly break Joe's. Right?

Did Joe Louis have a better chin than Ali?
Did Joe Louis have a better chin than Larry Holmes?
Did Joe have a better chin than Foreman?
Did Joe even have a better chin than Jerry Quarry?

Not so great punchers dropped him. Buddy Baer knocked him down. Jim Braddock knocked him down. Tony Galento knocked him down. Little Billy Conn had him staggering and holding on. Max Schmeling dropped him multiple times and stopped him. Jersey Joe Walcott dropped him three times in two fights. Rocky Marciano dropped him multiple times and stopped him. Hell, the only win Joe has over a big puncher was Max Baer, who had a broken right hand entering the fight.

Think Norton's power jab would bother Joe Louis? Think Ken's overhand right would hurt Joe Louis?

Just because Ali could get his jaw broken by Norton and remain upright, does that mean Joe Louis does, too?

The boxes they've been placed in are 'Joe could punch' and 'Norton was chinny.' So you can't divert from that. You can't talk about how Norton had a great jab that matched Ali's jab and Larry's jab in their fights ... and how that might bother Joe Louis, who didn't handle jabbers well.

You can't talk about Joe's chin ... no matter how many times it betrayed him ... no matter how many times he relied on his power to save himself ... in discussions like this, it never even comes up.

We must always steer the conversation back to Joe's punch and Norton's chin. And nobody can dare say maybe Joe's chin couldn't handle Ken's punch or Ken's jab.

Good thing some of us on this board think outside the boxes, or the conversations around here would be pretty brief and everyone would agree with everything, depending on what box the fighter fit in.

Have a nice weekend.

 

How many strawmen in one post? Literally none of your extensive post addresses a single thing I've said.

My point, my one and only point, is very simple - you seem to suggest that because Norton took Ali and Holmes the distance a combined four times in close fights, he isn't vulnerable to HWs with elite level power (which neither Ali nor Holmes possessed). I'm disagreeing with you because, well, because Norton's career evidences his vulnerability to fighters with elite level power very clearly.

That's the only point I'm making. If you'd like to address it, I'd be interested to read what you have to say.

P.s. tomorrow we'll be able to say that Wilder fights Chisora next month.

 

Christ.

The only point I'm making is Joe Louis in 1937 probably doesn't beat the Ken Norton who Larry Holmes won the title from in 1978.

Because Joe Louis wasn't at his best yet, and Norton still was.

That's the only point I'm making. I don't think 1937 Louis beats 1978 Norton. That's my whole point. That's all.

I'm not "seeming to suggest" anything else. I'm stating flatly what I mean.

You don't have read between any lines. I keep repeating exactly what I mean.

Joe Louis was struggling with Pastor. He was struggling with Farr. He was getting floored by Braddock. He wasn't there yet. He got there afterwards. But not in 1937.

I said PAGES AGO 1938 Joe Louis probably knocks out 1979 Norton, because Norton fell off the cliff after the 15-round Holmes battle, and Joe Louis got better. I have no misconceptions about Ken's chin. It was fine. No better, no worse than any top contender's chin from that era.

But, 1937 Louis vs 1978 Norton ... Norton was still too good, and Joe wasn't there yet.

Hardly a controversial statement.


From there, it went to people demanding to know who he fought who punched hard. And I said Ali and Holmes punched hard, they knocked out practically every big name of their eras who they faced.

And that seemed to **** people off, because they weren't expecting that answer.

So then it went to WHO HITS HARDER? Cooney or Holmes? Like that means anything when talking about 1937 Louis fighting 1978 Ken Norton.

Anyway, I'm done. If you disagree,cool. It's all hypothetical anyway.

 

You'd be in a small minority that would pick 1978 Norton over 1937 Louis, but that's fine, I haven't called you out for holding that view.

Where I've challenged what you have said, is citing surving Ali and Holmes in response to a claim Norton never proved he could withstand elite power.

If you think Norton gets to Louis first, then again, you're in a minority, but that's fine, its just an opinion .Neither Ali nor Holmes hit as hard as Louis, though, they're poor examples to give in support of Norton's capacity to withstand elite level power.

Ali has the greatest list of stoppage victims in HW history, yet Norton took him the distance 3 times, whilst Foreman stopped him inside 2 rounds. Why do you think that was? If you properly consider the answer to that question, you'll finally understand the point multiple posters have tried to make to you in this thread.

 

Yes.

 

78 Norton might beat 37 Louis or could go to a close decision but 1942 207 lbs Louis KOs him much like Shavers did.