A. Say that Joe Louis had not retired after fighting Joe Walcott but had stayed on untill sombody took the title from him? How long could he have draged it out taking into acount that he had the title in his posesion? B. Say that his career was as it was up to the Marciano, fight but he had decided to hang around (knowing that he would never be champion) and cash in on his name to get a few more big money fights?
That is quite likley, but if (hypotheticaly) he had enough left after the second Walcott fight to beat Charles, then he might have got an easy run.
I think that its possible that Joe Louis could have retained his title against Ezzard Charles, but the reason he didn't, was simply due to inactivity in my opinion. Had Louis kept busy after the Walcott fights, like Janitor has implied, he might have preserved enough of his skills and reflexes to barely squeak by Charles. A few more world title fights would have done Louis good, when trying to pay off some of the dept that he had. As for how he'd do against Marciano, I really don't think that he would have beaten the rock no matter how he tried to approach the match. I think its possible that a young Louis could have beaten Rocky, but he'd have to be at his absolute best in order to do it. Marciano was just plain unstoppable in the early 1950's.
I don't see the Louis of the two Walcott fights, even if he remained active, coming close to beating the best version of a heavyweight Charles. He barely won 3 of the 15 rounds in their actual meeting, and I don't see simply being active making up for that wide a margin. If he had not retired, than he holds the title until he fights Charles. I don't see anything more though.
He could have beaten an couple of top 10 fighters but then Rocky probably would have never got the shot to fight him.........
The Charles fight was not even a close fight, Louis barly won 4 rounds on my card. I think its Charles that beats Louis, and thus history repeats itself with Walcott Charles III, and than Marciano Walcott.
I think Louis has a real strong shot at knocking charles out late had they fought in 1948, probably behind on the cards. Louis after all did catch walcott in 48, and louis was sharper faster harder hitting in 1948 compared to 1950. I scored the charles-louis fight in 1950 10 rounds to 5, louis defintley won more than 3 rounds that one poster tried to claim, louis puffed charles face up badly in the fight. A younger louis in 48 connects and connects harder and with combinations. i think he takes charles. louis then takes henry and baker before getting stopped by marciano in 1951 to end his throne.
If Joe had not retired, he still would have been defeated by Ezzard Charles. It's really immaterial whether or not the retirement made any difference. Joe was on his way down one way or another.
Of course even if Louis had got past Charles in 48 he would not have gone away and neither would Walcott. He would have had to rematch one or the other of them a little further down the line and then he would have been stuffed.
The saddest thing is that Louis virtually had to come back in order to pay the Taxman. For a generous guy, and a champion, to be forced into that was a very sad chapter for boxing!