Does Joe Louis stand the test of time?

Size is no guarantee of durability.

Was Primo Carnera more durable than Paulino Uzcdun?

Was Lennox Lewis more durable than Evander Holyfield?

Was Wladamir Klitschko more durable than James Toney?

I submit that the answer to all of the above is no.

 

Mu

Yeah its because he never faced a bigger man with a jab like wlad's that's why...Primo Carnera was a circus act hes no gauge.

 

No I'm not at all, your reaching for that and its not there..Its styles what I'm getting at combined with the size difference. I'm basing my assessment on common sense pal..Joe Louis wasn't as strong as Brewster or Wlad hes a cruiser. Just like Holy wasn't as strong as Bowe And Lennox. Its physically impossible. If u get a fighter that weighs 14 7lb and a fighter that weighs 17 7lb and they are both world class atheletes than the advantage is always with the big man. Size strength durability etc

 

Here I must disagree.

He was a former lineal champion, and whatever his limitations, he was very good from a technical standpoint.

We would expect him to have some degree of success with these tactics, if they were going to work for Wlad.

It’s not even as if it was a competitive losing effort, Louis just shut him down.

 

Ive never heard anyone remotely rate Carnera. Big strong man not much else. Huge huge size advantage for that era. We wouldn't expect him to have the same success as Wlad as he simply was nowhere near as good !

 

How strange. You haven't mentioned styles at all, until now. You've mentioned nothing but size, weight and now, how this made Brewster a stronger more robust opponent for Wlad.

Bearing in mind Brewster beat Wlad and you are, at the same time, stating Louis couldn't beat Wlad (or even hurt today's super heavies, as you mention in a previous post), as well as claiming Brewster has these physical advantages over Louis, it really isn't a reach to suggest that you were implying Louis couldn't beat Brewster, either.

Your common sense is flawed. David Haye - essentially a blown up cruiserweight - brought as much, if not more, to the heavyweight scene than most of the so-called Super Heavyweights had seen in years - even stunning the 300+ Russian giant. He didn't do so through his use of elite boxing skills or massive weight advantage, did he? So what did he use then?

 

My god your drifting off from originally what I was saying...Haye is fleet footed, he looks for angles. Louis is the polar opposite with his feet.He meets head on in most cases...Haye wouldn't of stood a chance a gainst any super heavys weve been talking about. Bowe and lewis vitali wreck him. Wlads overly cautious that's why it went the 12. Crystal clear now pal I DID NOT SAY BREWSTER WOULD BEAT LOUIS.More robust and could absorb better I have no doubt. My common sense is not flawed. I said louis 's size would **** him. His skill isn't the issue. Skills more often than not get swamped by size when your talking about heavys. That 300lb valuev is the worst big man up until that point since Carnera.

 

The people who rated Carner, were the people who had to contend with him as an opponent, or potential opponent.

They had to take him very seriously indeed.

He was not a particularly heavy hitter for his size, but he was actually pretty good from a technical standpoint, and he knew how to fight big.

The fact that Louis was able to go through him so easily, would be worrying for Wlad to say the least.

 

No need to get your panties in a wad.

I am more than aware of your original point(s), which started out as Louis couldn't hurt today's Super Heavyweights; then, moved towards him being less tough than modern Heavies and has then, essentially, become purely a 'size would be the deciding factor' argument.

You've summarized your position by stating:

"I said louis 's size would **** him. His skill isn't the issue. Skills more often than not get swamped by size when your talking about heavys."

That actually says more than you perhaps intended about the 'Super' Heavyweight scene. Nonetheless - on top of the matter of size differences, you have added that Joe Louis either doesn't have the skill or, even if he did, it wouldn't matter - (because of the size).

I rest my case on the basis of the above. You can call your view common sense, if you like, but I call it, at best, extremely simplistic and greatly misguided. Boxing without skills being a factor, isn't Boxing. In other words, you might as well be claiming that Louis couldn't even compete with Wlad because it's about size not skills.

That's not a view I'm going to agree with.

 

This reads like you actually believe Haye had better footwork than Louis. Byrd and Haye often get mistaken for swift movers around the ring. They weren't , mostly because of the extra bulk they packed on to compete in the HW division. Which btw was done since the HW landscape at the time was an easier ticket than their own natural weight classes.

You're correct that Haye looks for openings , his whole game was to posture on the outside and leap in with an over hand swing when he see's a gap. Fleet footed he wasn't nor did he have the foot work to allow him follow up on anything other than a 1-2.
On the front foot Haye is pretty much useless and is in the same class of journeyman when it comes to moving forward like Louis.
His success comes from being on the back foot fighting an ambush style and its why he was trying to goad Wlad to come onto him during a number of rounds.
Wlad knew he'd get bombed out if he took it to him and its why he pecked and held , pecked and held from the outside over and over.
He used Haye's clumsiness and inefficiency to come forward against him and won simply by being big and awkward aided by being permitted to clinch and lean down on Haye every time he got close.

Wlads boxing skills or jab had no answer for Povetkin who was natural come forward boxer who could effectively cut the distance.
Joe may look slow moving in but he's just looking for that point thats slightly out of range before he steps in and pounces like a rattle snake with a vicious right hand to the jaw followed by chopping hooks to the rib section.

Wlad would probably be better off trying to fight Louis off than trying to clinch him. As you can see here , Joe would have met the Klitschko hug wit a right hand up the middle.

http://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/imported_assets/2167547/blanket.gif

Louis was no Povetkin and would have gotten off a lot quicker. He wouldn't have ignored the body attack like Povetkin did either and Wlad would feel pain he's never felt before.

 

As far as skill level of course. (does anyone who know anything about the fight game actually believe Fury,or Wilder or some of the other would be kings today are as skilled as J.Louis was ?) If you do believe that, I own a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. But,yes Louis would struggle with some of the giants in the fight game today. In some cases he would be outweighed by at least 50lbs. But the fighters from the mid sixties through the early ninties who had the combination of size AND skills would destroy most of these pretenders today.

 

2013-10-05 : Wladimir Klitschko 241¾ lbs beat Alexander Povetkin 225¾ lbs by UD in round 12 of 12

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Wladimir_Klitschko_vs._Alexander_Povetkin

YDKSAB

 

Agreed - Haye was quite capable of wrong-footing himself, as he sought to find position. Not a fluid mover, at all.

 

For what it is worth, Povetkin is about the size Louis would be today, for better or worse.

 

Oh ok, I completely retract all of my statements about the state of the present heavyweight division because you know, I'm scared.

Is that what you want me to say?

Why don't you go back to 1918 or 1919 and tell Jack Dempsey he pimped his wife.