no. This is not kindergarten. If you want to present and exchange arguments about whether or not Joe Louis need appear in a top ten HW resume list, you can do so on Boxrec or Check Hook.
The boxing knowledge is being lost…educate don’t give up. If they aren’t willing to learn move on from them. Louis has the second best resume ever. Beat a lot of champions (not alphabet holders) Baer, Braddock, Carnera, Sharkey, Walcott, Schmeling. Beat great fighters like Bivins,(the underrated) Pastor, Conn. Big men like Buddy Baer and Abe Simone. Getting completely underrated and disrespected here *second best amongst heavyweights
You and @mr. magoo did a great job, in cherry picking the 2 worst resume's from the 10 ATG's I mentioned above. Yes, Marciano and Bowe are debatable, but are you seriously putting Louis's resume above the other 8 heavys?
Good discussion. At this point, in Louis' defense, I will quote a 70's US defense consultant... "Quantity has a quality all its own."
Let’s see. Twenty six world title fight wins, victories over six past present or future heavyweight champs and two light heavy champs, and beat several hall of famers. I’d say his resume is better than the vast majority of heavyweight champions with Muhammad Ali being one of the few exceptions. Saying that guys like Holmes, Frazier, Marciano, Liston or Tyson have better legacies wouldn’t fly with too many people who know Louis in depth.
I didn’t cherry pick. But I specifically asked about THAT one as it should be blatantly obvious as to why it shouldn’t be better than Louis’ resume. Seems like you just arbitrarily listed men without thinking much about it first
Dont dodge the question.. "26 World title wins" "better legacies" you are dragging this discussion into a different direction. We are talking about quality of opposition here and im 100% sure 7 of those 10 names I mentioned have the better resume. We are not talking about longevity or Resume, we are talking QUALITY of opposition. You guys act like his 5 best wins are against top 10 heavys, while his top 3 best wins arent even top 14 and Baer is arguably not even top 25. Im willing to defend this position anyday.
But you've already changed your position FIrst you were absolutely ready to argue that he didn't belong in the top ten - now it's the top 8. Eight might very well be the absolute outlier for his resume. But that's not what you said.
I never said Louis's resume is not belonging in the top 10. I said its DEBATABLE, that his resume isn't top 10. Big difference. The Top 7-8 range is, where I think his resume has no chance with the other heavies.
Not dodging the question at all. Schmeling, Baer, Walcott, etc WERE atg’s. How many ATG’s did Tyson beat ? I count two and both were past it. Ditto lennox Lewis. Joe Frazier’s win over Ali was probably better than any Louis ever had, but his lack of depth by comparison takes him out of the discussion. Liston has Patterson, Machen, Folley, Williams and an aging Valdez. Not to mention losses to two journeyman.
Name the other champs resumes top five wins forget three. Then move it to ten. Then you’ll see why Joe Louis is the number 2. Most champs have two good wins. The better have 3-5. Louis has like 8 excellent scalps.
Anybody can debate anything, though. People have debated whether aliens built the pyramids. Other people have debated whether the Earth is a flat disk. Boot up YouTube, search for debates, and you'll find some doozies. That said, if all you meant by "debatable" was that there might be some person, somewhere, willing to argue the point, I agree.
