Does Joe Louis stand the test of time?

I think he would be a major factor in any era. His record may not look as pretty (or with modern matchmaking it may look prettier), but he has a good chance to take out any heavy, big or small, put in front of him. If anything, it is the slicker, faster, smaller sort that troubled him more.

 

His legacy has already stood the test of time an then some. It's been nearly 70 years since he posted his last title defense, and since that time we've seen around 3-4 strong heavyweight eras and several waves of ATG's come and go.. Yet he still makes most people's top 3 and even a some folk's #1...

 

I have to say that Abe and Buddy don't seem to be anywhere near the talent level of a Wlad or Lennox or Riddick, tho. Those type would cause problems for Joe but the reverse is also true. Joe's quick, precise and fully-leveraged combos could KO anyone or all of those three. And he didn't require a particularly big window to unleash them.

 

And what about the Lewis destroyers McCall and Rahman ? Where is their level ?
I haven't problem with Joe Louis' size but i think his legacy vastly overrated considering he never
beat an ATG heavyweight fighter.

 

I never say this as being important personally, because not may great heavyweights have.

Greatness is ultimately built on consistency against very good heavyweights, not the occasional win over a great heavyweight.

 

Yes and No. His Championship reign has stood the test of time as one of the greatest accomplishments in the sports history. It's no because, he suffers in a h2h sense compared to others on the list.

 

The best way to measure a fighter, who scored an all-time upset, is to take the upset off his record, and then see how he looks.

McCall never beat Lewis:

An inconsistent contender, who showed impressive longevity.

Rahman never beat Lewis:

One of the better contenders of Lewis's era, who moved on the WBC title after Lewis retired.

Schmeling never beat Louis:

A lineal champion, who was consistently knocking over top five ranked contenders, over a period of a number of years.

 

Louis was easy to hit and certainly would be easier to hit today by the bigger better trained guys. When you include video footage he would be found out relatively fast with all the media coverage and ways modern camps work and have to readjust his hands low parry style bc he would get hammered with counter rights and easily out boxed with such plodding footwork. What Ali had was movement and length,he didnt rely on mythodically breaking down his opponents,he relied on staying away and out pointing them for the most part which would transfer better than Louis's style,even though he himself was not imp[ossible to hit you just had to work at it more.

Louis did not fight refined tall boxers,like ali did ...one just has to look at how each era champion struggled and against who and gage how difficult those fighters would actually be in other eras to determine how past Champions would actually do,its not hard.