Could Joe Louis beat Mike Tyson?

Ok, so it was his over confidence, lack of training and his pawing left jab that Schmelling exploited that contributed to his defeat. I can see how that could happen. As I said to you, sh*t happens in boxing.

And as for Schmelling being a great fighter, being one of the best in your era doesn’t make you great. But judgements on who is great is very much subjective, so I won’t argue with you about it. Suffice to say, the bottom line is that the best boxer of his era (Louis)was KO’d by an inferior fighter to him…great or not…(Schmelling.)

As for sloppy fights…I don’t believe Tyson was prime against eitherTillis or Green…he was 19 fights in, and the experienced Tillis represented a step up for him. Louis himself was 17 fights in…a similar timeline… in when he was taken the distance by a guy called Natie Brown…not exactly a world beater was he, looking at his very average record.

But yes, the Smith fight did show Tyson’s weakness in the clinch…something he never seemed to address.

As for sloppiness in their prime, the limited Tony Galento knocked Louis on his ass and little Billy Conn was up and doing well for 12 rounds against Louis. Yes Louis ultimately KO’d them but he showed…like Tyson did…that he was only human.

 

Well my comparison had to do with their temperament not with skill. Both guys don't really like to trade punches and generally don't take many risks.

 

Louis found out the hard way that he and Schmeling weren't as far apart as he thought and Schmeling was the much more experienced fighter, he'd had 60 fights whilst Louis had only 25 (more than two times the experience).

Well when do you think Tyson's prime starts because it didn't really last very long, I always thought it was from '86 to '89, the Spinks fight was as good as he got.

Getting knocked down in a flash and being given consistent trouble are two different things. You are right on Billy Conn, but Billy Conn was a great fighter. Jack Johnson got knocked down by Stanley Ketchel and was given problems by Philadelphia Jack O'Brien and Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey was wobbled by Georges Carpentier so it isn't uncommon for a great little man to give a great big man trouble those types of guys prove that size isn't everything. And like I said, when Louis had trouble in the first fight he corrected it in the rematch which is what happened with him and Conn (though they were passed their primes). Neither of those guys were coming off losses.

I definitely never said or implied that Joe Louis was a God, we're not debating about who's a god and who's not.

 

But then you have to think of all the men Tyson DIDN'T KO in 1 round. Like Pinklon Thomas, Bone crusher Smith, Mitch Green, Tyrell Biggs. Although I lean towards Tyson to win.

 

I think Tyson wins as well but this "Louis doesn't even last 30 seconds lolz" talk is absolute nonsense.

 

My phrase “only human” didn’t mean that you were implying that Louis was God. I simply meant that Louis, like Tyson had less than perfect fights against inferior opposition.

Initially you highlighted Tillis, Green and Smith as “glorified cans” that gave Tyson trouble. Firstly I disagree(d) with your description of them, and my many points in further posts thereafter were…to summarise…saying that no matter how great a fighter you are…you are going to have bad fights or at the very least bad times in fights, against opponents that you were expected to beat comfortably. The occasional struggles or dodgy fights do not define who you are/were as a fighter.

And yes of course Schmelling and Louis were closer in ability than Tyson and the three fighters you mentioned who you say gave him trouble, hence why Tyson beat all of them and Louis was KO’d by Schmelling.
But what I’m saying is that all those fights signified “a bad day at the office” for both Tyson and Louis in varying degrees.

I mentioned Galento simply to respond to your point about sloppiness. Yes you’re correct that this was a sloppy moment as opposed to a sloppy fight, but it could have proven very costly. Kudos to Louis getting up and getting the job done.

And as for Billy Conn…he was a great LHW not a great HW and he gave Louis a hard time for a large part of their fight.
When Tyson faced a great LHW in Spinks, he got the job done in 91 seconds! No 12 rounds of chasing shadows for Tyson.

And that is my point…there’s always something that you can find to compare favourably or less favourably with other ATG fighters. You say Louis was not as sloppy against fighters like Tillis, Green and Smith. But then again I say Tyson would never let a small guy like Conn give him headaches the way he did against Louis.

As for prime tears, Tyson’s best years were 86-89 and no he didn’t last as long at the top as Louis which is why Joe is a too 2 ATG HW and Mike isn’t.
But I also believe that Tyson losing his crown at 23 against Douglas in the way he did hurts his legacy, and is my main reason why I don’t include him in my top 6 ATG HWs.

EDIT: Sorry I confused Tyson’s prime years to his peak form, my bad. I think his prime years were 86-91. His peak form 86-89 with his stellar year 1988.

 

This I agree with.

 

I like Louis in this matchup via late TKO.

Some say Tyson had the best ever combo of speed & power in the history of the HW division. I rate Louis the best. Imo he was equally as fast with his hands and had equal power to Iron Mike, but was much more pinpoint with his shots, with better technique and threw more combos. Louis also had a far superior jab.

I usually never get into the boxer's supposed mentalities but suffice it to say that Louis wouldn't lose that deadpan stare and there would be no hint of intimidation from The Brown Bomber.

I can envision Joe beating Mike to the punch with his right hand, the same sort of shot that Holyfield nailed Tyson with in the 11th that led to the stoppage in fight #1. Except, when Louis does it, Tyson goes down. Joe's ability to get inside behind his jab along with his straighter punching, would enable him to do this.

But of course Tyson is Tyson and at his best is a serious threat to any HW in history.

 

Fair enough.

Spinks was scared sh*tless and pretty much lost the fight before it started. Wasn't as fast or as talented as Conn in my opinion.

He fought Green and Tillis in '86 so I was wondering which fight we could say that his prime truly began. Maybe it was the Marvis Frazier fight, I don't really know.

 

I think he was improving fight by fight from the Tillis contest and leading up to the Berbick title fight. Maybe he really came of age prime wise against Berbick.
Tillis was probably a wake up call for him, and he didn’t really put a foot…or fist…wrong for a long time after that fight.

As for Spinks, he may well have had some trepidation facing Tyson but I won’t take anything away from Mike because of that. He still had to go in there and get the job done. Fear or no fear though, 91 seconds is just ridiculous…Spinks was like a feather in a hurricane that night. Brutal.

Spinks and Conn? Not much between them tbh. Conn was quicker, Spinks more awkward and had the edge on power.
I wonder if a Conn v Spinks thread has been done yet. I’m 99.99% sure it must have been.

 

If his prime started with the Berbick fight that means it only lasted about 8 fights.

Conn wins a straightforward decision imo. Faster, more experienced, better defense, just has to stay away from the Spinks jinx.

 

Personally I think Tyson’s prime ended around 15 fights or so,up to 1991 after the second Ruddock fight and before prison. Lots of people disagree with me because of his resounding defeat against Douglas, but Tyson was 23 and there was no deterioration in his physical health. If he decided to booze, sh*g around, and not train, that’s his choice. He got his ass handed to him on that night for whatever reason, but to me he was still in his prime. And this is from a Tyson fan, but I say it as I see it.

His peak form was 86-89 but prime years…late 1986-1991. In my opinion anyway..

 

Do people really think it's unfeasible for Joe Louis to beat Tyson? Sure, I'd favour Mike and I generally consider Louis to be one of the most overrated fighters ever (even if he is my number 2 heavyweight), but to say he has no chance? Seriously?

 

Tyson had also fired Kevin Rooney and had stopped doing the stuff that Rooney and Cus had taught him and the guys he replaced Rooney with were incompetent. And of course there was the boozing and shagging around and the lack of training prior to that fight. He also had a lot of drama with Robin Givens. I always thought it was mightily ironic that Tokyo - the place where Tyson and Givens had their honeymoon - was also the place where Tyson suffered his first defeat.

If he had replaced Rooney with an experienced trainer like Eddie Futch and Archie Moore (who had offered to train him) or he had just rehired Kevin Rooney and gotten himself under control, things might have turned out differently. But Tyson at that point was bent on his own destruction.

 

Totally agree. The bottom line and put simply was that his self destructive behaviour ultimately led to his demise, resulting in his devastating loss to Douglas and ending up in prison.

In between he managed to win a few more boxing matches including a couple of 1st round stoppages and two very creditable victories over the highly rated and dangerous (at the time) Ruddock. But then that was that.