Decade vs Decade Tournament. Match 1 1970s vs 1940s

Ali of the 1970s gets knocked out by Joe Louis, imo.

 

Alis sharp straight right lead baffles Joe all night long for mine. Joe is too textbook, The guys who troubled Ali were unorthodox

 

70's
Ali
Olivares
Canto
Foster
Monzon



40's
Robinson
Pep
Williams
70's takes it 5-3.

 

I think he would be better at Light Heavyweight, he seemed to hit his own there IMO. Looking at footage he has the tools to beat Foster IMO. A solid chin, decent power, good counter-puncher, aggresive and a body puncher. Throw in the fact he was used to fighting small, he beats Foster IMO.

 

:nut

 

The surest answer to the question is Ali would have beaten Louis , and it even would not have been close. Louis may win a round or two if he elevates over himself .

 

ali of the 70s did not have the legs to get away from Joe Louis. Joe Louis has the tools and ability to finish Ali off when he hurts him. And he would.

 

REVOLVERMANIA. He's Back!!!

 

I think Ali up until 74ish still had enough foot speed to get away from Joe when needed. Alis chin and handspeed allowed him to stay in range and compete with punchers like Frazier, Foreman, Shavers and Lyle during the 70s. Louis has great handspeed when he is in rhythm and setting the pace. Ali throws that right lead fast and it is a sharp punch. I feel it would bust Joes rhythm and Ali could dictate the pace. Alis jab was still a weapon through the early 70s. Ali has proven his body and jaw can take punishment. Ali is also the bigger and physically stronger man. His strength is such a forgotten asset, he would clinch and walk guys around the ring in his later career wearing them down.
The rope a dope has been simplified by people who think Ali just lay on the ropes took shots and hoped guys punched themselves out. They forget how Ali would actually beat guys to the punch while against the ropes, lean on guys and actually win exchanges in close.

You could be right about Louis having the tools to finish Ali when(?) he hurt him but plenty of other guys during this period were thought to too only they found that Ali somehow found a way to win.

 

Yeah I too see a close decision. I think Alis adaptability is a big factor. Ali did so many things wrong but at the right time for him. Going against the ropes against Foreman and actually winning the exchanges. Throwing right hand leads. Moving straight back from punches, not having a sustained body attack, his footwork was anything but textbook, all things that you wouldnt teach someone but they worked for him.
Joe on the other hand was the perfect model to use to teach someone how to box. This i see as his problem against Ali. Ali would know what Joe was going to do and Joe would have no idea what way Ali would fight him. Ali would change if plan A didnt work, Joe never did this. Ive heard so many times how Joe was better in rematches and as blasphemous as this might be i dont think Joe was an intelligent boxer and didnt know how to change when fights were not going to plan, he was better in rematches because a different plan was implimented

 

I really like Bivins at mw as well personally, he's always been my pick of the murderer's row. Burley is the best out of them p4p though in my perception, Bivins did have some kind of natural size advantage over him.

 

My picks

1. Heavy--Louis (though the 1970's have much more depth)

2. Lightheavy--Charles (I would also pick Moore and Conn over Foster)

3. Middle--Monzon (but the 1940's have much more depth)

4. Welter--Robinson

5. Light--Duran

6. Feather--Pep (Saddler would also win this)

7. Bantam--Olivares

8. Fly--pass--haven't seen any flyweights from the forties.