Joe Louis decline ? Or was Walcott and Charles that good ?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Dance84, Mar 5, 2020.


  1. tommytheduke

    tommytheduke Active Member Full Member

    633
    167
    Nov 21, 2013
    He was shot by the time he fought Charles. In 1st Walcott fight, he had his moments, and certainly the punching power was still there, what failed him was his killer instinct when he had JJW hurt in the 9th.
     
    LoadedGlove likes this.
  2. Charlietf

    Charlietf Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,935
    2,505
    Feb 25, 2020
    What a nonsense. Walcott did not have the chin to survive against a prime Louis. In fact is Charles the one who would do better
     
  3. Dance84

    Dance84 Unicorn and seastar land Full Member

    8,066
    5,454
    Oct 11, 2017
    lol
     
  4. Charlietf

    Charlietf Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,935
    2,505
    Feb 25, 2020
    Great argument, i can't say anything against this
     
  5. Dance84

    Dance84 Unicorn and seastar land Full Member

    8,066
    5,454
    Oct 11, 2017
    not arguing just how u call it nonsense
     
    DavidC77 likes this.
  6. Charlietf

    Charlietf Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,935
    2,505
    Feb 25, 2020
    I explained this before mate. Walcott was a great fighter but his chin was not good enough to survive early against a young explosive savage machine like Joseph louis barrow
     
    George Crowcroft and Dance84 like this.
  7. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,464
    2,827
    Aug 26, 2011
    A little of both. He was in more of a decline with Charles. The first Walcott fight I would call on the slide more than he was past it. Walcott's style and movement would always give Louis issues, prime or no prime.
     
  8. CharlesBurley

    CharlesBurley Well-Known Member banned Full Member

    2,065
    1,886
    Feb 23, 2020
    Or question 3, was Joe Louis ever that good in the first place? Got battered by Schmelling, wasn't far off from losing to Conn, went to the wire with Farr. Other opponents lost but bounced him off the canvas first. He also never fought the top black contenders for the most part.

    But in turn he had slowed down and had less hunger when he faced Walcott/Charles. And they were 2 of his best opponents by far
     
    Dance84 likes this.
  9. DavidC77

    DavidC77 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,945
    1,652
    Aug 30, 2018
    I think Walcott would have the skill to evade and frustrate Louis and could go the distance.

    That is my opinion on a hypothetical situation.

    You disagree but to label my opinion as 'what a nonsense' because it's different from yours says far more about you than it does about me.
     
  10. DavidC77

    DavidC77 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,945
    1,652
    Aug 30, 2018
    I've never really understood why some people think Louis is the greatest heavyweight ever.

    I can think of a number of champions who I think would have beaten him.
     
  11. Fury's Love Handles

    Fury's Love Handles Mrkoolkevin Full Member

    195
    331
    Feb 22, 2020
    "Greatest" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as best head-to-head.
     
  12. DavidC77

    DavidC77 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,945
    1,652
    Aug 30, 2018
    I consider 'greatest' to mean greater and therefore better than the others so...
     
  13. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,581
    11,095
    Oct 28, 2017
    Is Bowe greater than Holyfield?
     
  14. DavidC77

    DavidC77 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,945
    1,652
    Aug 30, 2018
    No. I would argue that Holyfield is better pound for pound.

    He beat Bowe despite a 30lb weight disadvantage.

    Although the steroids probably helped.
     
  15. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,296
    27,907
    Jan 3, 2007
    Joe Louis beats both Walcott and Charles in his prime. Charles would always be a tougher fight though
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.