Formeman Vs Louis

A peak Louis was about 10 lbs smaller than a peak Foreman. That, as a size difference, isn't much at all. Jimmy Young was smaller than Louis, and yet was able to tie Foreman up. Young didn't move much faster than Louis did in that fight, but that was just enough to throw Foreman's timing off (moving slowly away from Foreman was better than dancing, because it's easier to counter that way).

Foreman was a force of nature- IF you came at him. If you didn't and he was forced to go hunting, he could look very silly indeed. Louis has the edge in handspeed and could hit just as hard as Foreman in my opinion. The skill differential means that it's going to be hard for Foreman to land cleanly with his big shots, while those big swings of Foreman's are going to be laughably easy for Louis to counter. Foreman's style is perfect for Louis in much the same way that Frazier's was perfect for Foreman: the puncher vs the counter-puncher. Louis was a very effective finisher and would obviously dominate Foreman in close if the action went there.

Louis TKO2 in a Foreman-Frazier style beatdown. Only Foreman's heart and chin would allow him to keep getting up.

 

Actually, there were many more boxers of the ilk of Peralta and Young in the 1930s and 1940s than the 1970s. Foreman was much better suited to the 1970s, where there were less classic boxers to expose him.

 

What?!

 

Louis TKO9.

 

Foreman 5th

 

Both Louis and Foreman looked unbeatable, until someone devised a perfect game plan to beat them. In Louis case, it was Schmeling, a solid boxer for his time and a classy fellow, but not a great fighter. For Foreman, it was Ali, who is top 3 on anybody's ATG list. Besides, Schmeling fought in hostile territory to beat Louis, while Ali had every conceivable advantage in Zaire.

I just can't see Schmeling coming up with gameplan to beat Foreman. Ali beats Louis though.

I can't see Braddock knocking down Foreman.

I can't see Louis flattening Frazier in a few rounds. He could win, but Frazier seems to have a real chance against Louis, never against Foreman.

Even an old Foreman would probably beat Marciano.

For accomplishments, Joe Louis is Nr. 1 or 2 on my ATG list, depending on my mood. But H2H, several big, hard punching HW's of later eras could beat him.

 

Foreman weighed what--218? It's not like we're talking about him fighting Benny Leanard here. Louis was 205, no big difference.

 

But one can reverse this the other way: I can't see Louis letting Young get away like Foreman did in the 7th round of their fight; I can't see Louis losing to a 1974 Ali; I doubt Lyle would have much success against Louis. Ultimately, styles make fights, and it was the big punchers who were most stylistically suited to Louis.

I would venture that there are much more similarities between a rope-a-doping Ali and (especially) a Jimmy Young with Joe Louis than there are between Billy Conn or Max Schmeling and George Foreman. Ali beat Foreman not so much by exorbing punishment, but by avoiding it sans movement and firing quick counter-punches. Louis punched just as fast(if not faster) than the Ali of Zaire, and much much harder. Jimmy Young, against Foreman, resembled Joe Louis but without any of the power or consistent combination punching.

Comparing Foreman and the technically sound boxers who troubled Louis the most is an exercise in futility. Schmeling beat Louis by counter-punching and using the overhand right; a prime Foreman couldn't throw a good overhand right if his life depended on it, and wasn't hardly a sound counter-puncher. Billy Conn's success against Louis was based on being a small target with clever footwork; Foreman liked to bounce around aimlessly, but he did not have clever footwork nor was he a small target.

One can compare accomplishments all day long: the fact is that Louis matches up stylistically with Foreman very well, and the boxers who beat Foreman resemble Louis far more than the boxers who troubled Louis resemble Foreman. I think there can be little more guarantee of victory than that.

 

Exactly: no-one says that Lennox Lewis would be too big for Ali, but a prime Lewis would have nearly 30 lbs on a peak Ali. I'd still pick Ali to win, and in some respects Lewis's size would be a disadvantage. Louis beat bigger men than Foreman (Buddy Baer, Primo Carnera) and their size was a hinderance. Even Max Baer was about Foreman's size.

 

I think Joe goes out like Norton. Not to say that that Norton is as good as Joe but Joe's chin is not much better than Ken. Once Foreman connects (which he surely would), it's lala land for Joe.

 

Would you agree that Louis's defense, power and speed are considerably greater than Norton's, specifically on the back foot? Can we be so sure that- given the skill differential- that Foreman would even connect with a big punch? Even if he did, Foreman was never a one-punch-KO-artist in his prime, and Louis was never KO'd by one punch. We'd be talking about both Foreman and Louis behaving as they never had before, which I consider unlikely.

 

He was never 1-punch but when he connects you are in trouble, and that is when he is going to finish you.

Joe's has an aggresive style, probably because back then he was always the bigger puncher. Or even if Joe decides to circle around, Foreman is good in cutting the ring. He lands, puts Joe in trouble, then finishes him.

 

I'm sure I would be, but I'm not convinced that Louis would be.

While he was aggressive, Louis was neither an impatient boxer (if anything, he was too patient at times) nor was he necessarily a front foot boxer. Indeed, when the massive Buddy Baer charged at him, Louis let him come in and counter-punched accordingly.

Foreman was good at cutting off the ring, but Louis isn't going to be dancing. It's one thing to charge after someone like Ali, who threw arm punches, but against every other opponent Foreman was far less effective at cutting off the ring because he was worried about the cross-fire. Even against Norton, it was Norton's crummy backfoot defense that let him down; he was having no problem staying away from Foreman. Heck, even Scott LeDoux was a hard find for Foreman. This "Foreman had good footwork" myth is based primarily on a misconception that it's harder to cut off the ring on someone dancing and throwing arm-punches than to do so for someone moving steadily and throwing full-body punches.

 

You argue your points very well and I respect that, but I disagree. Louis looked like a great boxer in his era, but boxing, like any other sport, evolved from the 1930's to the 1970's. I do believe that Ali of 1974 beats Louis, he still had enough of his great reflexes and has so incredibly tough. He did win against Foreman not just by movement but also by taking body shots that would have destroyed a lesser man.

Sure, one can compare accomplishments all day long. To me, it is pretty obvious that Frazier and Norton were better fighters than Louis' best wins in his prime. Generally, Louis fought smaller fighters that would be cruiserweights today and while size isn't everything, there is a reson for weight classes in boxing. Foreman was the freak of nature - type that could easily neutralize superior skill in an opponent. To beat Foreman, it would take either a very ood chin or very good defense and Louis didn't have either. As far as Young is concerned, I believe Foreman was mentally way past his best at that fight. If he would perform like he did against Young, Louis might beat him. The Foreman who took the title from Frazier beats any version of Louis IMO.

 

I don't think the size difference is great enough to be a factor. We're talking about possibly the greatest HW of all time here..