Ali or Louis; who looks better on film?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bokaj, May 1, 2011.


  1. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,144
    13,100
    Jan 4, 2008
    And why do you think that?

    Ps. Focus on the two fighters prime years.
     
  2. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    They do different things better, Ali pisses on Louis with movement/footwork, jab, handspeed, use of range, Louis is far better punching technique, actually sits on his punches and turns them over and actually gets power into his shots (to say the least), better guard/parrying (well Ali can lift his gloes up but doesn't usually)

    But I'd go with Ali because Ali is thinking and making adjustments where as Louis is essentially a robot who doesn't adjust until he's been drilled for a rematch
     
  3. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Its called plodding and was often exploited
     
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,740
    29,094
    Jun 2, 2006
    Ali v Williams
    Louis v Baer

    ???????????
    Ali.
     
  5. jaffay

    jaffay New Orleans Hornets Full Member

    3,980
    18
    Jun 24, 2007
    tough question

    Louis was more textbook, maybe even more explosive when he went for the kill

    Ali was more flashy, creative, unpredictable

    depends what you like
     
  6. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,144
    13,100
    Jan 4, 2008
    I see where you're coming from and the vast majority would agree with you, but I don't. I actually think that Ali's punching technique is generally the most underrated aspect of any fighter here on ESB. Louis' punching technique was fantastic, though.
     
  7. Valane

    Valane Active Member Full Member

    1,462
    3
    Sep 11, 2010


    Rhythm and movement are natural.


    I think Ali at his best had a far more aesthetically pleasing style, Joe punches with more authority and his combinations were beautiful. Ali can actually think though and had versatility which is worth consideration. He is the more natural talent.
     
  8. Pachilles

    Pachilles Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,294
    28
    Nov 15, 2009
    You make it sound like Ali's movement was jst for show, pointless and useless. It was the key factor in most of his victories during the 60's, the Liston fights especially.

    It annoys me to no end when people take these kind of viewpoints. Like with Ray Leonard, Calzaghe and De La Hoya's flurries being just for show. Ali's footwork being overkill. Whitaker or Jones' clowning. Some people seem to have beef with anything the slightest bit colourful or flashy. Well guess what, they were more effective and successful than Ken Buchanan
     
  9. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,578
    Nov 24, 2005
    The only man to beat Louis in his prime was Schmeling, who liked to fight flat-footed too.
     
  10. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    Louis is the fighter to look at if you're a boxer looking to learn, though there's a lot to be learned from Ali's use of angles and footwork also. Visually Ali is the far more flashier boxer while the only thing "flashy" about Louis are his knockouts. It usually takes some time to truly appreciate him, and not just cast him aside as a plodder.
     
  11. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Well I see what you're saying but a boxer really should learn to get their hips and or lower back into the torque of the punch for when they need to punnish a man. Ali never learnt this

    Archie Moore 'I wish I taught him 'Clay' to take a man out with 1 punch' (quote from my recollection)
     
  12. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    And it made it easier for Schmelling to time and counter him, made it possible for Walcott and Conn to twist him round their finger dancing circles around him, meant Goddoy could close the gap on him

    His footwork isn't terrible, and his forward/backward footwork can be decent at times although his balance is far from great and he was often knocked down, his lateral movement is pretty none existant and he doesn't cut off the ring effectively.

    Things I hear about Louis's footwork:

    'It's efficient' - so is standing still not doing anything it doesn't make it a good idea

    'It worked for him' - well it didn't always and he succeeded despite of it rather than because of it
     
  13. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,114
    10,526
    Jul 28, 2009

    :clap:
     
  14. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    You're right with those criticisms, but a lot of fighters don't have the necessary talent to pull off more complex footwork. I can't see Louis ever being much fleet of foot while retaining his power and ability to counter at all times.

    There are times when I believe Louis could have just opened up a bit more and put his opponents away far earlier than he did, but in the end his patience won out regardless.
     
  15. ali, but louis was increible against carnera, schmeling,baer or galento