debunking the myth of louis being completely past it ...

he also seemed to leaning forward a lot more than he did in his prime ?????

 

Limited use of the right had does not equate to only having one hand. What non participants of the sport dont understand is it is harder to time a right hand than a punch from the front hand against a smaller opponent. Writers are very articulate but they dont take into account what adjustments it takes for an older or bigger but still good fighter to be effective.

Joe Louis got broader and more muscle bound as he got older. It meant he had to hide his rear shoulder from the opposition because it is easier for an opponent to react before the right lands if he can watch it being drawn across the chest as it travels. Joe was forced to adjust his footing so that he was more side on but it meant his right hand was that further away from target. The leaner and more supple Joe Louis could fire shots directly from the stance because he had such an athletic edge over just about any fighter who ever lived.

As Joes body matured he became less of an athlete but more of a stronger specimen. He was no longer built in a way where he could let a right hand go knowing the other guy could not see it coming. It altered the way Joe had to fight in order to be successful.

He was still effective but because joe would never throw unless he was certain to land it took him longer to orchestrate the clean openings for the right hand to come off the lefts. It was easier to jab the man into the direction of the right and thats why he leaned over as Louis came in with the jab in later fights. He still got the job done with both hands but he was more restricted when you break down his style adjustments. He knew what he was doing. The film bares this out.

 

Louis still was a very capable guy

 

i boxed for 5 years and am now a coach yes i understand how hard it is to rotate and land the back (right) hand as mine wasnt particulary good.i still believe louis only had limited use.

 

You're a boxing coach after boxing for only 5 years? Wow.

 

the five years that i boxed were in the 70's and early 80's, then i had a go at coaching which came to nothing made a comeback and after a gap of 28 years started coaching again at amateur level.
some of the best coches/trainers never boxed and it doesnt matter whether you have or (i used to think it did) not i dont think

 

:good I had t he same problem.

Limited use of the right hand for Joe Louis still equates to being a good right hand puncher for anyone else,especially when he was still flooring decent fighters with it.

Post war louis was less of a two handed puncher for all the reasons i mentioned before. He had become more muscle bound as he filled out and it restricted his punch variety so he adapted and was still effective with both hands. In flashes when he could trap a fighter it was still there but it was just that second or two harder to pull the trigger compared to the way he could before the war. most of the time he was content to beat a man down with jabs and walk them onto one or two piece counters.

Unless he was fighting great fighters Old Louis was a round or three slower getting the job done. To hear some people a 1951 Louis would not have got past Johnny Paycheck but this is simply not true. Louis was highly regarded in 1951 and could have started favourite had he been matched with Walcott rather than Marciano. In 51' Only Charles was considered better than Louis who Walcott had failed against twice already.