Did Joe Louis duck any fighter???

From the summer of 1940 to 1948, Elmer Ray recorded a streak consisting of 72-2-1-58, with his only losses being to Joe Walcott and Turkey Thompson. His wins consisted of Joe Walcott, Lee Salvold, Buddy Millard and Ezzard Charles ( possibly a robbery. ) Frankly, I think Ray was about as qualified and even more so than many of the contenders that Louis had faced to this point. Louis did however beat the men who were consistantly ranked at the top though.

 

i don't think big george's head was in a fit state to challenge ali.
if it had been and they'd have fought again then history would have been different.but..........

 

I thought Walcott was handling Louis pretty well in both fights, wouldn't say dominating but in boxing terms he remained a step ahead all the way, until the sudden KO in their rematch of course when Louis turned the tables.

Lem Franklin was thrown in what was somewhat of an eliminator for Louis's title against Bob Pastor, a fighter you might consider the gatekeeper to challenging Joe Louis (after Louis beat him twice). Louis fought Simon in a rematch with no pay, you could say that it wasn't much more than a promotional event with Simon being used as the punching bag.

Bivins was unfortunate to have his best years during the war. By the time Louis returned, Bivins was starting to fade. His long unbeaten streak was ended by Walcott, who supposedly beat him clearly despite the odd scoring, and ended up winning some and losing some after that.

 

I think a tad too much is made out of Ali never giving a Foreman a rematch. It wasn't like the outcome of their first meeting was close or controversial either. Foreman was knocked out....Period.... It also would have been different had Foreman rebounded by putting together a streak over the best heavys out there, but really he didn't. He took a full 16 months off following the Ali loss, then returned and gave a very entertaining, but shaky performance against #5 contender Ron Lyle. After that, he pretty much went down hill, taking on opponents who's quality ranged from mediocre to half way decent. In the end, he lost to Jimmy Young.

 

Anyone who has seen the farce that Foreman had against 5 opponents of varying quality would know that he was in no way ready for an immediate rematch with Ali. He was intimidated by a journeyman using the rope a dope and seemed to gas after going a couple of rounds.

After facing Lyle and Frazier again he seemed to be on form but soon after he lost to Jimmy Young.

 

do you think jersey joe regretted that showboatin in the re-match

 

I do and he did as well. Just a very dumb move by an experienced pro.

 

Agreed,

had Foreman and Ali met again anytime around 1976, I think Ali would have at least decisioned him in similar fashion to the way that Young did. Sometimes one fighter has another's number........Simple as that........

 

NO! Louis never ducked anyone... But his title days from '37 to '49 weren't exactly filled with a shitload of great fighters, either........ Louis' best opponent was Joe Walcott... And Louis and Walcott didn't even fight until 1947....... Louis didn't duck anyone....

MR.BILL

 

There will always be some contenders that champion's didnt fight during there reign, but Louis fought really all the deserving challagers and contenders during his reign.

Bivins's best form came during the War, when he was given the title ''Duration Champion'' By the time Louis was back, Bivins was starting to fade. His long unbeaten run was ended when he was defeated by Jersey Joe Walcott.

 

A badly slipped Joe Louis is still Joe Louis. The knockout is what made that rematch, brilliant as it were.

Including the possible Bivins win, Walcott was on a good streak going into the first Louis fight, even if some of them were close. That was his first title shot, the first time he'd performed well against a ring legend, and it must have boosted his confidence. At this stage I think he was better than Bivins was in the early '40s.

The only people Walcott was losing to, aside from Rex Layne, were Hall of Famers who were slightly better than him. Charles beat Walcott twice, but then he'd also beaten Bivins four times. As it turns out, I think both Bivins and Walcott could have been good three or four year champions in a different era.

But this is going off topic.

 

This content is protected

.

 

I remember him saying that during "The Way It Was" program. He did go out more aggressively for the 11th round and paid for it.

Obviously keeping his hands at his side and taunting Louis to take a swing at him didn't help his case either.

 

Walcott arguably lost the first fight by not being aggressive enough in the closing stages, ala ODH against Tito. Perhaps he thought he had to be more forceful?

 

Possibly although if that was his idea then he was going about it in the wrong way. He basically gave the greatest puncher of all time an opportunity to take a shot at his unprotected chin.

Not that he would have known it but he also had enough of a lead on the scorecards so that he could have given away a couple of rounds and still walked away with the title.