Does Joe Louis stand the test of time?

No he didn't hit as hard as Louis did he. Both great combo punchers so I can see your point with louis having the better chance agaist certain bigger fighters while hes in there with his dig. My problem is, I don't think Louis rides the rough moments nearly as well as Holyfield.

 

Louis shipped some heavy punishment as well.

The big guys that he fought were not as good as these guys, but some of them probably hit roughly as hard.

 

On film Louis' punching technique makes my jaw drop in amazement...stand the test of time? Yeah...definitely.

 

The only fact is today's super heavies suck.

 

Joe Louis is my favourite fighter of all time.

Even above Clay/Ali.

He would have been a great in any era.

There was a great documentary about 30yrs ago on Sky sports all about him, and what a fantastic tribute it was to him.

I would love to watch it again, it was narrated by Ian Darke, so if any body has it please post it, or if you don't want to PM me and i will buy a copy off you, i have looked for years to find it but with no success, it really is a superb watch.

 

Go visit a gym and tell them that.

 

I can see why you might consider Holyfield more robust than Louis. It’s an opinion and that’s fair enough. I don’t necessarily agree with it - at least - not to the extent that makes a whole lot of difference, in the scheme of things. I don't really see Louis sharing anything in common with Holyfield, style-wise.

Thus, if Holyfield's faring better is predicated upon a perspective that he and Louis would potentially share the same type of punishment against Wlad, then it's moot, IMO. It's just not the basis for my view of how Louis/Wlad would go.

In terms of robustness - Louis was only stopped once in his prime and that was on his way up through the ranks. As alluded to, previously in this thread, Louis shipped a lot of leather before the punishment caught up with him in the 12th round. OK, Schmeling was effectively a cruiserweight but no one can continuously take straight right hands by the dozen, without them eventually resulting in an adverse reaction.

So, in my opinion, Louis was neither fragile nor a boxer who had to fight head/face first. I don't think a more seasoned Louis allows himself to be tagged by Wlad, as a matter of strategy, tactics or style. I don’t think he would fight to survive either - it's not in his make-up. However, that doesn’t mean the only option left open to Louis is to stand right in front of Wlad.

It always seems to come back to the idea that Louis didn't have the movement to successfully engage Wlad without, by default, taking Wlad's biggest power shots. I just don't subscribe to this view of Louis. He was more than able to take the fight to Wlad; influence the space between them; force Wlad to react and make mistakes, create openings and land his own shots.

 

wlad imo is the one who influences the space between them easier. Louis to get inside is risky against anyone with such a size advantage. How could a fella like louis with his footwork and size dictate against super heavy with a great jab better than his own ?? even if he gets past wlads jab hes getting grabbed instantly

 

Yes he stands the test of time

 

The answer is two fold. He needs to use a drawing jab. Jab from a distance he knows he can't land from in order to draw a reaction from Wlad and then be able to consistantly counter the reaction. He had the head movement to pull it off and his semi crouch helps keeps his legs loaded to do it as well as make him a smaller target to Wlad. You need to force your opponent to make the first move as the smaller guy and counter that move.

Failing in forcing a counter punching game, He would need to cross the distance while staying safe and he has been able to do it in the past against a few opponents. Granted Wlad is a different kettle of fish than the heavyweight scene of the 1930's but he's done it to lesser opponents like the Baer brothers and Abe Simon who, if lacking the technical craft, were at least comparably sized to Wlad.

Another big factor would be how the clinch was handled. If Steve Smoger reffed the fight I'd give Louis a far better chance to win based solely on how quick the ref is to break the clinches. Smoger is smart enough to understand when a guy is working to actively free his hands to punch and when a guy is stalling. I haven't looked it up but I bet Wlad hasn't had Smoger ref one of his fights and if he did Wlad didn't look nearly as good as the rounds passed.

I'm not at all saying Joe would 100% beat Wlad. Don't get me wrong. But I'm saying Joe has dealt with being the smaller man quite well in the past and has showed the skills required for beating Wlad. Just he hasn't beaten a guy that big with that kind of skill level.

The reality is we'll never know. Kinda sad but true.

 

Risk is an inherent part of the game and Louis is going to need to engage - he's not going to win from the outside. But, I don't see this as a problem for Louis. It would be in his nature do so.

And, it's not like it hasn't been done before by Boxers, who were smaller than Wlad. Look at a what a determined Lamon Brewster was able to do. This, despite Wlad's multiple attempts at his 'Mount-My-Little-Opponent' method.

By the way, a superior reach does not equate to a superior jab. And, if getting past Wlad's jab means that all Joe can expect is to be 'grabbed', then this relates to concerns raised in prior posts - mine and those of others' - about a lot depending on Wlad not being allowed to foul, i.e. the ref will need to be fair and on his back for this constantly, even DQ'ing him, if necessary - Wlad's wrestling techniques are not Boxing, let alone being part of a 'superior' Boxing skillset...

 

I know a reach doesn't mean a better jab but that's one thing that Wlad's very good at. Lamon Brewster was over 2 stone heavier than Louis could soak up a hell of a lot and comeback, plus hes quite noticeably stronger than Louis. Again I think more robust

 

You keep coming back to Wlad's jab, but it is not a punch that anybody ever had much success against Louis with.

I get it that Primo Carnera was not as good as Wlad, but he used exactly the tactics that you think are going to work for Wlad, and it didn’t get him anywhere.

Louis seems to have been very adept at overcoming this style.

 

Basing robustness on weight alone is dubious. And, what are you basing your assessment of strength on?

It looks to me, as though you're implying Joe Louis couldn't even beat Lamon Brewster.