DOES JOE LOUIS REACH 48 :0 AGAINST HOLMES OPPOSITION?

Would you take a 21-year-old Larry Holmes, who was got stopped twice by Nick Wells and got floored and lost to Duane Bobick ... would you pick that 21 year old Larry Holmes over Primo Carnera, Max Baer, Paulino Uzcudun and everyone else Joe Louis beat when he was 21?

No? If not, how many losses would that 21-year-old Holmes have against the guys Joe Louis fought by the time he was 21? A dozen losses for Holmes? Maybe more?

How about when Holmes was a pro at 22? And Larry was getting floored by the likes of Kevin Isaac.

Would you take a 22-year-old Holmes in his first year as a pro over Max Schmeling, Jack Sharkey or Bob Pastor? How many losses there?

If we compare them by age, Holmes loses DOZENS of fights against Joe's comp. If we go bout by bout, Holmes is a shell of himself when he gets into bouts 51, 52, 53 ... compared to where Joe was in his 51st and 52nd bouts.

Either way, Louis has a much better chance of getting to 48-0 with Holmes' record than Larry does getting to 58-1 against Joe's opponents.

 

Joe Louis was a much better fighter in his first 48 fights than Larry Holmes was in his first 48 fights.

By Holmes' 50th fight, Larry was getting a gift decision over Carl Williams and had lost twice to Spinks.

In Louis' 50th fight, he knocked out Abe Simon the first time and was arguably still in his prime.

Joe Louis had also beaten Max Baer, Jim Braddock, Primo Carnera, Max Schmeling, John Henry Lewis, Tommy Farr, Paulino Uzcudun, Bob Pastor ... I don't know if Holmes' opposition was much better in his first 48. Certainly not all time it wasn't.

 

Louis turned pro at a 20 years of age and was baptized in fire. Fighting genuine contenders Lee Rampage x2, Poreda, Perroni, Massera, and former Champion Primo Carnera within his first 12 months as Pro! These guys are already on the level as some of Holmes' prime title defenses.

In his second year Louis was battling vets Baer, Schmeling, Sharkey, Levinksy, Uzucudon...etc. These guys were past their best but for a second year pro...it's insane Louis only lost the one fight to Schmeling, absolutely insane.

Holmes turned pro at 24 and was cuddled for 5 years as the heir apparent to Ali.

So if Louis was nurtured as an amateur for that long, and carefully managed until he was 29, stepping up against aging contenders Shavers and Norton. Absolutely he could match Holmes run! There would be no Schmeling learning curve fight. A matured Louis would blast Shavers and Norton out, and make Cooney look like Buddy Baer. Weaver and 11 fight novice Spoon would be the only guy to challenge Louis from the 48, and I think they get stopped.

 

Check and mate.

 

Schmeling was a great fighter. At his best he would have put up a great fight against anyone.

 

Schmeling was a great fighter. At his best he would have put up a great fight against anyone.

 

Pretty sure yes ..

 

Short answer, I think so


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

it is so hard to put a guy of one era in with others of another era. Styles change. I am not sure Holmes would do well today with big guys like Fury and Joshua and Klitchko..

 

Even Mike Weaver????

 

Post boxing Louis seemed to age quickly in general. It could have been health issues, but at 65, Louis looked 85.

 

There was 3 inches in height and a stone in weight In Holmes favour. He would be noticeably bigger

 

More than that, even Lorenzo Zanon!

 

Holmes was 6'3 209 vs Shavers
Louis was 6'2 207.5 vs Abe Simon

Louis wasnt as small as made out to be.