Is Louis's 25 title defenses the greatest accomplishment in boxing?

sort of like that, it barely made the sports pages outside the Americas and sure as **** didn't make global news generally (and as much as we might hate the fact, broner self promoted himself into at least as famous a name as wlad)

 

if you mean globally within the boxing media then you didn't read what i wrote in the (). If they promote a wlad fight based on beating louis's record (however legitimate that is) the general media wouldn't care.

 

Yes cotto will always be the one who dethroned martinez which is great. But with him being such a huge underdog to Golovkin is it is hard valuing his championship too highly.

apart from mw Hopkins

Glad we've managed to find some common ground. As I said i do agree with most of what you've said anyways. I just think sometimes a lineal obsession can lead to titles not being valued enough. There's a fine balance and for me it's down to ranking and perception.

For the record I do think Vitali was the better fighter and had he not retired this conversation would never have taken place.

 

This will be recognized by non-boxing publications as well.

You can't blame the fighter in this case.

Same goes with the NFL, quarterbacks will continually break records year in and year out because of the rule changes.

There is no possible way for a fighter to unify all 4 belts first and then fight mandatories.

Is it much easier to get a hold of a belt then before? Of course, there are 4 of them. Once Wlad grabs the WBC belt all of his defenses should be counted retroactively.

Additionally, Wlad has fought much more difficult fighters than Joe did. Taller, stronger, faster, more styles, deeper experience (amateur & professional).

 

The lack of clarity does actually infuriate me. I was trying to explain the super bantamweight situation to my housemate after the quigg fight.

 

except the 1st line(and sort of the last one) i agree with all that and never wrote anything against it. Unless it was a fantastic fight vs wilder or maybe fury i don't see wlad making back page news though.

 

Have you tried explaining something like that to a casual fan though, whilst said fighter is parading his belt.

 

Yes, it is.

A lot of fighters put together a great year or two, or score a huge upset, or put themselves at the top of some pound for pound lists for extended periods.

But there's always some guy out there who they can't beat, or is too heavy to fight, or politics are keeping them from meeting.

Joe Louis made 25 successful defenses of his undipusted heavyeight title. He did it over an 11-year period where he could beat any man in the entire world. (He wasn't a welterweight who couldn't beat the best middleweight or a middleweight who couldn't beat the best light heavy).

He also managed to knock out the five heavyweight champs who preceded him (Schmeling, Sharkey, Carnera, Baer and Braddock) and one who would eventually follow him (Walcott).

For 11 years (and arguably longer than that), Joe Louis was the best in the entire world, bar none.

He wins. Biggest accomplishment ever.

 

It's not the simplicity that's so much the issues as the stupidity of the situation. My mate was like "why don't they just all fight each other to see who's the best" my response was "doesn't work like that"

 

Consider that Pac was only a flyweight due to 24 hour weigh in's.

Lineal champ of course, but fighting a genuinely small guy as a massive weight cutter.

 

Sasakul was not a big guy, that's the fight I'm referring to. That's the only fight of note Manny had at 112.

Yes; Manny beat much bigger guys. But the whole 'went from flyweight to fighting middleweight sized fighters' is misleading IMO.

 

Sasakul weighed 112lbs even when he weighed in on the day, just for some perspective. So no, it's not a wash.