The first thing I want to say is that I am not saying at all that the Louis of 1951 is comparable to the Louis of 1941. But the issue is was he...
"fits the mould of a medium sized heavyweight." Of the 21 champions from Sullivan to Johansson/Patterson, Louis I think comes in at #5 in size....
Well, the problem with this analysis is that Walcott is simply a tougher opponent than most he fought. Yes, Louis had trouble at 211 with Walcott...
Louis felt he was too light against Bivins. This also seems an odd weight, so perhaps something physically happened to him (illness?) or perhaps...
Well, which champions were bigger than Louis? since Sullivan? The giants Willard and Carnera, Baer was slightly bigger. Jeffries was...
In fairness to Solomons and the BBBC, it was arrogant of the IBC to name two of their fighters to fight for the championship w/o a box-off. After...
Except I think Joe Louis would have to be considered a larger elite heavyweight by the standards of that time. If you mean giants like Carnera...
All the above posts are true, but perhaps a bit misleading. Marciano fought five men over 210 lbs. One was the definitely great, but old, Joe...
To the original question, Joe Louis would get my vote as the top heavyweight as of 1955 with Johnson second. I don't want to get involved in all...
Doesn't Tom McNeeley deserve a mention here?
"No HW challenger in history made a worse showing." What about Liston in 1965?
I went over to boxrec and read the record your post pointed to, and I don't think it makes your case. Stander had a respectable 23-1-1 record...
Rademacher was a ridiculous challenger, but looking at his whole career, his is by no means the worst to get a shot. He never lost to a man who at...
