Joe Louis: can we be honest with ourselves?

You have only seen one, but there are 21! See below:

 

Double,

Most of the X champs Louis fought were well past their best. I'm not discounting the fact that he won many title matches. It's just I do not find him as dominant vs. the 4 beat he fought. I also find his competition level to be low, and just two of his 26 title matches vs African Americans.

Louis has a losing record vs the best heavies he fought in Marciano, Charles, Schmeling. Sure he was passed his prime in two of these matches, but since are using examples of washed up guys, then so can I.


I'm not heard to mislead you with the post, I think Joe Louis was an all time great. Top 8 guys for sure.

The 1972 Miami Dolphins are the only undefeated NFL football team, that does not make them the best. In fact, few think they were.

 

Oh my fukin Lord.

 

Ali is way overrated.

Let's take his three best opponents. Frazier, Holmes and Norton.

Against his best composition adding up all the scorecards Ali is losing in rounds via:

117-135-18

Let's forget he stopped Frazier in their last bout. Let's also forget Ali was a very sick man going into his bout with Holmes. Why look at these minor details?

Ali certainly top 8 all time but the best?

 

Thought you was bring serious at first

 

It's called faulty logic. AKA....intellectual diarrhea.

 

I would say that it has more to do with the quality of the opposition you beat.

Preferably measured in terms that are less subject to interpretation, such as ranking.

 

there is no defined way to rate fighters and there never will be.

but looking at louis he passes on all but the most gerrymandered catagories;

good on film - yes
beat world class fighters of different styles - yes
learned from mistakes - yes
solid physically - yes
long reign vs vast majority of contenders - yes
still a force past prime - yes (included because it shows technical ability)

compared to

fought enough black guys regardless of them ranking below white guys - no
refused to support his country in ww2 to fight newer contenders - no
won every single fight beyond any shadow of a doubt - no
undefeated vs 'blwn up lhw's' - no

i'm all for looking at things from new angles but come on.

 

Joe Louis, let’s be honest with ourselves.

The honest ****ysis would be that his accomplishments in the real physical universe leave every other champion trying to justify their parity, including Ali.

The numbers speak for themselves.

 

Ridiculous post frome one obviously ignorant of Joe Louis and the era in which he fought other than staring at boxrec.

One must realize that the Joe Louis post WW2 is a different fighter than the pre-war Joe Louis. Louis did not have a serious boxing match for 4 years. Consider that Ray Robinson was only for 2.5 years and when he came back lost to a fighter Ralph Tiger Jones that was far inferior to the likes of Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles. Robinson was so out of synch that boxing writers were calling for his retirement.

Joe Louis is a fighter who depended on speed, timing and judgment of distance for his explosive power. Inactivity robbed him for much of this. Ring magazine founder Nat Fleischer wrote that by the time Louis lost to Rocky Marciano, who by the way weighed 185 pounds not 170, "Louis had long since lost his once devastating punch." When Louis retired as champion his record was 60-1, 51 ko's. When he came back losing to Charles and Marciano he had only 3 knockouts in his last 10 fights demonstrating that Fleischer was right.

The Walcott fight was the post WW2 version of Louis who was not close to the great fighter of the pre war years. Walcott had remained active whereas Louis was partying it up and boxing a few exhibitions against Army amateurs and had not trained seriously for 4 years at the end of the war. Even so Louis still starched him in the rematch, his last flash of greatness.

Dropped by Tony Galento, so what? Galento could punch certainly not worse than being dropped by Sonny Banks or Henry Cooper (Ali), Kevin Isaacs and Renaldo Snipes (Holmes), etc. Louis got up and dominated almost immediately.

As for the Conn fight, again one needs to know the history and circumstances surrounding the bout. Conn's size was actually a benefit to him because he could go underneath and around Louis where a bigger target could not. More importantly Louis did not want sports writers to say he "beat up on a little guy" so in giving the Light-heavy champ a title shot he forced himself to weigh in at under 200 pounds, something no fighter today would care about doing. Louis did not drink any water the day before the fight (back then they weighed in on the day of the fight) so he could meet his goal of under 200 pounds. Louis did well in the early rounds and began to tire due to dehydration. In the end he was able to bring it up from his gut and knock Conn out, that is what great fighters do.

Louis had 25 defenses, 21 knockouts and 17 of those were ten counts, not the tko variety, 5 in the 1st round. 51 ko's in 60 wins before the IRS forced comeback.

Not only was Joe Louis a great puncher, but he was a great boxer too. Not goign to go into it further because someone who doesn't understand these simple facts is not going to understand how econimically brilliant Joe Louis was and how subtle some of the things he did were.

 

Bra-vo

 

I agree with you 100%..Now some neophytes are trying to diminish the greatness of Joe Louis. Makes them feel so GOOD...And when someone like myself extoll the virtues of the prime Brown Bomber ,
I am considered a fanboy..Oh are they sadly mistaken...