This is a reasonably good analysis of what MIGHT happen. Let's take a look at what resembles a better look at reality, however. George Foreman weathered the storm of punchers, as well as a pontoon boat would weather the boredome of an afternoon of sitting on a calm lake, with nothing to do but cast a line into the water, prepare an easy lunch, and read the latest addition of Lame ass magazine. Of the great punchers that he faced, Foreman Ko'd all of them, and most of these guys were pretty well reguarded. Joe Frazier was an all time great puncher, with possibly the best left hook ever, ( a tool that often troubled Louis. ) Foreman absolutely devoured Frazier, the way that a retired salesman might enjoy eating a tuna fish sandwitch. In George's 81 pro fight career, he was only stopped but once, against what many consider to be the greatest fighter of all time, and largely due to exhaustion, rather than beig bested. What's more, his biggest achiles heel was a man who preffered to box his way to victory, rather than punch out a win. A man of Louis's profile, who was floored by the likes of Galento, Schmeling, Walcott and Baer, Bore no such description. :good
Calm down! Jesus, i've never treated you with anything but the upmost respect and have no idea what i've done to deserve being talked to in this tone. Anyway. As you so snotily pointed out your post had two parts. So did mine. I claimed that Bradock hit a bit at Heavyweight in adition to his LHW banging. Here's my position, if you're interested. As i'm sure you know Braddock had terrible hand trouble. In his fight with Levandonski in '33 Braddock was already on a fierce slide. Having broken his hand some three times already he broke it again in round 1 - but badly this time. Heart that he had he fought on, dropping a ten round decision using only his left. He was around 40-20 at this time. Not that Braddock knew it, but my opinion is that the seeds of his greatness were planted here. After the Levandonski fight, Braddock had no money for anything other than a consultation - he was told he needed surgery, and nothing else would do. Of course he couldn't afford it. Braddock re-broke his hand less than six weeks later knocking down Stillman in the first round. Stillman got back up and won a ten round decision. Best thing that ever happened to Braddock. Skip ahead a couple of months and a couple of loses and Braddock beats Kennedy leading with the left, and for the first time. He abondend his lauded right becaus he just couldn't trust it any more. More losses and more breaks, but when Braddock retired he got what most fighters take for granted now - a years lay of. He spent near to 12 months working on the docks - using only his left arm (his right was crushed and arthritic). When Braddock came back to the ring his right was healed for the first time in years and his left was vastly improved. As you may know he took the match with contender Griffin on two days notice. He won by 3rd round TKO using mainly the right. He punched his way to victory at heavy for the first time. In his next fight he took on the great, the all time great, John Henry Lewis at heavyweigt and became the first man to drop him ever, at any weight. I think i'm right in saying that Lewis had one of the busiest careers of anyone ever. In that time, the only other man to drop him would be Louis. He punched his way to victory. Next up was #1 ranked heavyweight Lasky. Braddock absoultley battered him. He punched his way to victory despite being seriously outweighed. And he used his left a great deal in this fight according to what I have. Braddock outboxed Baer. That fight doesn't help my case for Braddock as a puncher. But it's this guy who dropped Louis, not the 40-20 guy with the busted right and the underdeveloped left. In my opinion there is no bigger difference between peak and trough in terms of ability for any HW champ ever - and the guy who finally got the rest his right hand needed by retiring was a different fighter than the one who retired, not to mention a serious puncher. I think Braddock is amongst the most underated ever at the weight. As a puncher too, apparently. Louis picked him as a heavy puncher, as Janitor pointed out. I don't know what Farr said, but i bet it wasn't "he doesn't dent a milk carton at this weight" or some of the other bull**** that is in this thread.
After Shavers. But anyway, if Louis survives the first 3 IMO he would start to take control, but the first 3 rounds would be REAL tough for Louis because of his chin.
Reading a couple of these Fantasy match-ups recently has made me wonder if we inadvertently favour 1 punch KO artists more so than skilled accumulation type boxers. When we do the analysis we imagine each man on his best ever night, and this means we start thinking things like 'imagine if Marciano lands the right that destroyed Walcott and so on...' I am sure none of us would wish that kind of punch on our personal favorite, no matter how sturdy his whiskers are. The point I am making is, no matter how beautifully you box, over the course of 15 rounds you are bound to get nailed a few times. You don't want it to be Tysons, Foremans, Listons, or Shavers best punch that hits the sweet spot. Do you think a tournament setup favours the pure boxers and a one-off best night the punchers?
I realise this. I never said he couldn't punch at light-heavy (it would be nice if people paid attention).
Well he's hardly going to say "Jim's punches couldn't break an egg but because my chin's **** I went down anyway" is he. :huh
Actually for most of his career he wasn't. But against Farr (207), Louis (195) Baer - who also expressed admiration for Braddock's power (210), Lasky (200), Lewis (176) and Griffith (185) he proved himself a puncher. The average here is a lot higher than 185 i would think (though maths isn't my strong suit). I think you are confusing Braddock pre-retirment with post-retirement, or taking a sort of average over his career as regards his power. Have another look.
In terms of power I don't beleive there is. Some historians regard Max Baer as the hardest punching heavyweight champion ever. You simply don't get a significantly better test of your ability to take a hard shot than that.
He didn't really hurt Baer or Farr badly. The other three you mentioned average at around 187 so I think you're way off mark. By the way, virtually every top heavyweight has some knockouts- you could look at Tony Tucker's or even Bugner's CV and say "Wow, he stopped some guys on his way up". Big deal. Ali's record of stopping havyweights is a lot better than Braddock's, a superior level of chin he knocked down also- and he wasn't a particularly big hitter. But he outshines Jim in this dept. No doubts there. I can only summise that perhaps you dreamt about Braddock being a big punching wrecking machine and can't fathom if it was real or not.
Just becuase you fight a huge puncher, doesn't mean you take his best shots. I never thought Ali took Liston's best for example.
Yes but that is my exact point. Class wise there is. Earnie Shavers hits as hard as anyone, but when he stepped right up the opposition was too good. Foreman however had many more talents and assets and made his mark at the top, dramatically at times. Lets call Shaver's your Baer. Bottom line - Foreman is much much more dangerous than the likes of Shavers and Baer.
It is interesting to note that he said that Braddock and not Schmeling who had knocked him out was the second hardest puncher he ever faced after Max Baer. You can spin it however you want. The guys who knocked Louis down Schmeling, Braddock, Galento, Baer, Marciano were all punchers. If you have dozens of fights against ranked contenders instead of a handfull like George Foreman then you are going to get droped and rocked by guys like these.