Does Anybody Go Against The Status Quo - Tyson Over Louis as a Finisher?

It's kind of a common held opinion that Louis is the best finisher in HW history. If you asked me, I would believe that. I would agree that. But sometimes I wonder if that ideology has been hammered into my system. Do some people here consider Tyson to be a better finisher than Louis? I think you can make a legitimate case. And I'm sure some people actually think this... rather than just agreeing to the status quo. Uncommon ideas and input breeds good critical thinking and discussion. It also helps stop myth-making and revisionism.

I'm not saying this is the case here. But maybe someone will... what does ESB Classic think?

 

Added the poll.

The status quo is boxing fans, historians, and even fighters. So everyone (That's what makes it the status quo... :huh)

Generally, most people (Hence status quo) subscribe to the idea/belief the Joe Louis is the best finisher in HW History (Or even in all of boxing history). I'm here asking to try and see if anyone defies that position.

In other words, "status quo" is just another word for common held belief. The status quo is that SRR is the #1 P4P fighter. I could start a thread by saying "Generally most people have/believe." Which is the same thing really, just said differently.

 

A terrific post.

Yes, you make a good point that Louis was more methodical. Perhaps he's more guaranteed to finish you off if he gets you hurt than Tyson (Even though that statement doesn't make sense. Let's say more likely to).

The saying goes, though, that if Louis had you hurt he would finish you. It was just a simple matter of hook, line, and sinker. Tyson, on the other hand will ferociously go after you. Surviving that when hurt isn't going to be easy. Sometimes Tyson may be quicker to finish you, but maybe the methodical more scientific and accurate punches of Louis don't ever let you have the chance to get away.

It's really tough. I go back and forth in my mind, but I feel I just accept the majority thought on the matter. Because it's hard for me to go against it, even if there's a great case for it. I wonder why more people don't consider Tyson a better finisher than Louis? I think the case can be made though as we are doing.

Can't wait for others to chime in.

*Edit*

3 Responses and Nobodies Voted in the Poll!

 

Perhaps you are right. But do you see more potential in him as a finisher, since you feel he didn't have enough time.

He was still laying waste to guys quicker than Louis was in your comparison time-frame. That's says something, regardless of technique. Right?

 

I understand your point. I guess I should say reputable/knowledgable fans, historians, and boxers. At the end of the day, I didn't conduct a survey. But most people who know boxing and are boxing fans seem to put Louis ahead of the rest in terms of finishers. I'm not just making this up... I've heard it a thousand times for George Chuvalo to Bert Sugar to a lot of people here.

I understand your point. But maybe it's not clear, but I think it should be that I'm referring to reasonably knowledged boxing fans. I could survey random people in the street. Heck, I could survey a girls scout club and they would probably have no idea what I was talking. Same thing if I was talking to the jazz club... heck most citizens wouldn't know much to anything about boxing, and probably wouldn't know what to say or how to answer because they just don't know (Joe Louis can't be on the common persons radar).

The Status Quo for boxing fans that matter. And this doesn't count 14 year old boys who go on youtube to watch Mike Tyson Highlights. They don't count, I don't care if that sounds elitist.

Did we really have to go into all of that? The Status quo for anything boxing related now would be "Who is that?" Kids in my college class didn't even know who Manny Pacquaio was. So obviously I'm not talking about everyone. And when I mean Status Quo that doesn't imply a worldly overview of it.

And yes, obviously you can go against the grain and not be wrong. That's what makes it an opinion.

I apologize for using that word. It cause a rather lengthy and unnecessary discussion. If I would've said generally most knowledge fans, writers, and historians think "...etc" I would've figured most would take that as the same way.