Deeper Resume -Lennox Lewis Or Joe Louis?

People got to remember when Louis became his champion his resume aready read 4 world champions, Pastor, Retzlaff, Ettore, King Levinsky, Stanley Poreda, Lee Ramagex2, Patsy Perroni. Before he became world champion. Louis has the greatest contender resume of any HW champ.

Ali made up for lost time and there's very few opponents he could have fought he didn't. Louis could have hit 50 defenses easy. There was enough time and viable opponents to facilitate that. And while there were enough opponents for that there is no doubt Louis had scaled the more difficult part of that mountain.

 

Out of curiosity would you have Louis P4P number 1 if he did that?

 

That's it for me Fergy!

 

Hi Buddy.
On board with the first paragraph, not so sure about the easy 50 defences, as I recall there was a lot of controversy over quite a few of his opponents, and he was chided for as much, and at some stage the hacks termed it as " the bum of the month " so struggling with your assertion, that said enjoy your posts in the main.
stay safe, chat soon.
Mike.

 

He'd be a more general "GOAT" of boxing.

For P4P my position is that ranking a natural HW goes against the point of the exercise. Especially if they are a puncher. There's a bunch of definitions of P4P for the ones that are just comparing resume across weight classes then Louis would win. But I just feel like P4P isn't for fighters that belong at HW.

In Louis's era the best fighters went to HW/LHW and MW and fighters went as high on the ladder as they could so it was different. But you could still apply "P4P logic" within groups of boxers who fight each other. 6'2 is what I consider the southern cutoff for a "superheavy" for most of history. And Louis is either there or right below that.

 

GOAT of boxing could be interpreted as P4P GOAT kind of.

 

They weren't lineal but Louis technically reached 27 in the 50s!

All I can do is show is he had the time and the names. Let's say he averages a fight every 3 months. He could get there just after his 35th birthday.


22)0642 Conn
23)0942 Bivins
24)1242 Mauriello
25)0343 Harry Bobo
26)0643 Bettina
27)0943 Turkey Thompson
28)1243 Lem Franklin
29)0344 Sheppard
30)0644 Lee Murray
31)0944 Buddy Walker
32)1244 Lee Savold
33)0345 Joe Baksi
34)0645 Pat Valentino
35)0945 Lee Oma
36)1245 Buddy Scott
37)0346 Bill Petersen
38)0646 Bill Poland
39)0946 Fitzie Fitzpatrick
40)1246 Maxim
41)0347 Woodcock
42)0647 Tommy Gomez
43)0947 Elmer Ray
44)1247 Jersey Joe Walcott
45)0348 Tandberg
46)0648 Johnny Flynn
47)0948 Bernie Reynolds
48)1248 Ezzard Charles
49)0349 Kahut
50)0649 Cesar Brion
51)0949
52)1249
53)0349
54)0649
55)0949
56)1249
57)0350
58)0650
59)0950
60)1250
61)0351
62)0651
63)0951

 

Hi Buddy.
Interesting synopsis, thanks for prompt reply.
Mike.

 

For me it's Lewis. Lennox fought better men. If you lined up who Lennox fought they would destroy who Louis fought. Joe Louis has a better resume when you factor in history, length of reign, importance etc, but I still favor Lennox because I find the quality of his opposition to be far superior.

 

I agree.

Some say Joe beat more "Ring ranked" fighters or Joe beat more guys rated as "the next best heavyweight" other than him.

But if the Ring ranks Tony Galento as the next best heavyweight other than Joe Louis ... it makes the stat meaningless.

The quality of the fighters in the Ring ratings isn't always consistent. The second-best heavyweight in the world according to Ring in 1940 isn't necessarily equally as good as the second-best heavyweight in any other year.

Galento was the Ring number one contender going into 1940. Ali was number-one going into 1972. Vitali Klitschko was the number-one contender in 2003.

Is Galento on the same level as Ali and Vitali? Hell no.

So, while Lewis vs. Vitali and Louis vs. Galento may be a one-to-one comparison according to Ring Ratings (champ vs. next best heavyweight) ... it certainly isn't in terms of quality of opposition.

And that's what the stat is supposed to be supporting when people cite it to pump up Joe.

 

I'm going to put my tin hat on here but I think there's a huge elephant in the room with Joe's resume. Black fighters, or the lack thereof.

Once black men were allowed to fight for the title, they dominated the heavyweight division. There must be something about the physical make up of the black race that computes better to being large and athletic. But once Floyd Patterson lost to Sonny Liston and there was no black heavy forced to sit on the sidelines forever, black guys ruled the division pretty much until they moved on. The black talent pool in boxing withered as basketball and football offered many more opportunities to earn big money if you were both big and athletic.

This might be a simplistic view. Happy to be advised as it's not one that I have 100% faith in but it's a gut feeling that I can't shake.

 

Tbf his schedule probably would have slowed a little and he would have naturally declined anyway like he did end up doing. But I actually do think there was possible room for 35-40 defenses even though I wouldn't go far as 50+

 

Which black fighters in the Louis era could have threatened him but was overlooked? Who was Harry Wills to the Brown Bomber?

 

I don't really know tbh which is why I admitted to having little conviction. All I know is that they're not on his resume.

Breaking it down, Joe fought a lot of white cruiserweights. Not saying he ducked anyone or that it's his fault. But a resume with 220lb plus black heavies (if we accept that including black fighters into the mix strengthens the talent pool which is a bit of a no-brainer) is more testing. Not saying Joe couldn't have beaten them but we know that Lennox did. So while I'll happily accept that Joe is the better fighter, I think Lennox faced stiffer tests.

 

This is an average. Realistically at times he'd do more than 3 months and times he'd do worse. But Louis got his last two non lineal defenses in the same month in 1951. No reason to think Louis couldn't maintain that average.