Holmes or Louis: Who had the most impressive record?

Louis fought every contender, had no split title champions and rematched every worthy opponent.......Enough said

 

Walcott was better then any black challenger though

Problem is many black fighters never got a shot because of poor management. But Jersey Joe was still better then them IMO and if Louis beat the best black contender, he almost certainly would have beaten the other ones too

 

Louis fought every shape,color in the division and when he fought Walcott it was towards the end of his career, John Henry Lewis who was Ko'd in 1 by Louis had Beaten Al Gainer and Elmer Ray(early in Ray's career) but was a renowned Lightheavyweight. Galento beat Leroy Haynes and Lorenzo Pack. What Black fighters did Louis duck. I think the Arturo Godoys, Tony Galento,Farr, Baer's,etc. were the better fighters of his era and he held up well vs Charles(who fought every tough Black challenger of 2 decades) even though he was on the downside

 

Not to say John Henry would have beat him, obviously, but it was widely known he had been blinded in one eye for ages.

 

I love both guys infinitely and its a tough one to call.. Larry came up the hard way but Joe did have a lot of tough ones along the way and boxed when a lot of fighters were very hungry.. Joe has the edge pound for pound considering he was a lot smaller .. But i have to add the closeness comes from the way both men dominated for a great number of years and made a massive bunch of defences.. Larry boxed a whole lot of men outa sight who later became very solid champs in his absence. (Berbick, Witherspoon, Weaver) They were both greats .. Joe having the edge.. Honorable mention on how Holmes came back (not for Tyson) but to beat a tough live young Ray Mercer years after his prime had passed .. Testiment to his great skills..

 

Like Joe Frazier?

This was a first round win over a former light heavyweight champion who had not been stoped in over 100 fights.

It is prety much on a par with Mike Tysons blowout of Spinks.

 

I think Louis genuinly fought the most deserving challengers on paper. It was harder for black fighters to get financial backing then, hence less got ranked.

Louis prety much fought whoever ring magazine told him to. He had an idealistic beleif in defending the title and generaly took on whoever was the flavour of the day.

 

:good

 

It's not on par at all. For a start Spinks had two good eyes and was the linear heavyweight champion who had beaten an ATG to win the title. He was also unbeaten. That's just shyte up there.

 

I give Holmes the edge over Louis here. He was the first undefeated boxer to win 20 consecutive championship fights, and was active in every year of his reign (while Joe was iced during WW II). Larry also competed successfully against top flight opposition far past the age which Louis, Ali and everybody else except Foreman could have done. Holmes never had the sort of extended hiatus Big George did either. It's very close, with Louis having the clearly better competition, but what Larry did to Mercer at the age he did it surpasses what Joe could have done with an undefeated contender of Mercer's caliber in his mid 40s. (I rate Larry's win much more highly than Foreman's over Moorer, because George had lost every minute of every round until that knockout. Holmes dominated a peak Mercer over 12 complete rounds, a remarkable feat for somebody at his age.)