If Joe Louis continued to fight during the War, how many title defenses would he have ammassed in his Career? Over Forty?
depends if he would have gotten past top fighters like lee q murray, elmer ray, jimmy bivins, harry bobo, turkey thompson, lem franklin. would have been a tough road, i think he could do it..........
Depends if he gets burn out or not. He was fighting pretty often before the war. I dont see him lasting long at that type of pace. Just ask Henry Armstrong.
I think it verry likley that he would have broken the 30 barier and perhaps then some. I also think that he would probably have burned out a bit earlier. His next scheduled fight when he was stopped from defending the title was a rematch with Billy Conn. Next up would probably have been a fight with Tami Maurellio in 1942/43. Then Jimmy Bivins, Joe Baski Lee Q Murray Curtis Shepherd and Joey Maxim would have been in the mix. Bruce Woodcock might have been a big money fight that would have apealed to Jacobs.
Since the older Joe Louis beat a less faded version of Jimmy Bivins it is probably fair to say that he would have done so in 1943. I think that some of these guys might have been little more than formalities as challengers. There are a few names that you have to wonder about however. One name that interests me is Lee Q Murray. He gets rave reviews from his peers but there is little information available.
A few more, but not 40. It is likely Louis might have another loss too. Louis had at least 90 exhibitions during the war. Boxing was his job in the army. As such I do not think the war built up a lot of rust on Louis.
Yes sir, he was a 6'3 210lb boxer-puncher style. like holyfield, he was very good all around complete fighter, but not great in one particular area. hatchetman sheppard claimed in a ring magazine interview in the mid 1990s that Murray was the best fighter he ever fought, and would have taken holyfield and bowe(the current champs at the time). if you look at murrays win resume, it is very impressive filled with a large crop of wins over dangerous top contenders of all sizes. i used to have a large group of articles on murray but lost them when my computer virus deleted them, i will try to buy some more and post them here. totally agree
I agree with you here. Although, I believe Louis would have prevailed against all of these men, some of them would have made worthy challengers, and if nothing else, he certainly would have been fighting the absolute best of his era. Personally, I still think that he could have fought Lem Franklin in place of a rematch with Abe Simon in early 1942. Additionally, Elmer Ray was the #1 contender for a brief period around 1947, when he lost a majority decision to Joe Walcott. Louis could have easily given a Ray a shot either, before Ray had rematched Walcott, or even after there their split meetings. Ray is the Ring Magazine's number 44 all time great puncher - a fact I did not know until recently. He did very well over a 6.5 year period between 1940 - 1947, compiling an unbelievable streak of 65-1-0-52. Skeptics will say that his record at this time was a tad padded, and legitimately so, however his resume was not without substance. For one thing, he was quite possibly the most active fighting contender out there. For another, his comp list included Joe Walcott, Lee Savold, a respectable journeyman in Larry Lane, and a 25-1 prospect named Buddy Millard. Ray's only defeat during this time was to Turkey Thompson, another black fighter who I as previously stated, deserved a shot at Louis..... The benefit of hindsite is often awarded to Louis for not facing these men. The usual rhetoric entails claims such as " Louis defeated their conquerors, either before or after their winning streaks occured. " While this may be true, Louis was also giving title shots to men who had lost, or would eventually lose to men that Louis defeated. The main difference is that men like Elmer Ray and Lem Franklin were sporting winning streaks that were far superior to the Abe Simons, Jack Ropers, Tony Galento's, Al McCoy's, and yes even Joe Walcott at one point. I want it to be made clear that I don't think Louis's legacy should be diminished for failure to meet these fighters, as I firmly believe that the failure was not by any means his own. However, if we're going to use hindsite to justify his never fighting someone like Franklin, on the basis that he later lost to Bob Pastor and several others, then a the same preposterous claim could be used to excuse Holmes for passing up Greg Page. Holmes afterall defeated Berbick and Witherspoon who beat Page, either before or after Greg rose to #1 status, then later defeated Bey, shortly thereafter. I do not feel that Holmes should get a pass for this, but to preserve balance on the matter, neither should Louis.
