Joe Louis Never Proved That He Deserves The Number One Slot ATG Heavyweights

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008.


Page 1 of 7
  1. garymcfall

    garymcfall Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,526
    10
    May 19, 2007
    Joe Louis never proved in the ring that he deserves to be the greatest ever because he never beat a single top 10/top15 heavyweight of all time. Muhammad Ali on the other hand, beat three top tenners and several top 25's. Justify putting Louis above Ali in terms of greatness

    (This isnt an opinion, just interested to see how people who have Louis Number one justify his selection)
     
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    #1
  2. Russell

    Russell Loyal Member Full Member

    43,650
    13,048
    Apr 1, 2007
    Schmeling and Walcott aren't exactly low ranking HW's.
     
    Russell, Jan 10, 2008
    Russell, Jan 10, 2008
    #2
  3. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,235
    Feb 15, 2006
    Simple really.

    Louis fought in a weaker era but he was much more consistent and dominant.

    So take your pick.
     
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    #3
  4. garymcfall

    garymcfall Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,526
    10
    May 19, 2007
    Neither are Liston, Frazier , Foreman, Norton etc. I'm not disputing that Schmeling and Walcott werent great fighers, they were, im just asking how someone can justify having Louis infront of Ali in terms of legacy and greatness.
     
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    #4
  5. garymcfall

    garymcfall Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,526
    10
    May 19, 2007
    But do we know the truth about Joe Louis? Do we know how he'd really do against atg's such as marciano, frazier, foreman, dempsey, lewis, holmes etc? Ali beat three of the top ten greatest heavyweights of all time in my book so we KNOW that he is not only in that company, but probably the best in that company. The same can not be said for Louis, because he never actually proved it, true, or false?
     
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    garymcfall, Jan 10, 2008
    #5
  6. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    It's just an opinion to say Liston, Frazier and Foreman must rate higher than Walcott or Schmeling, for example.

    All-time rankings are just opinion.

    To say Ali must be number 1 because he beat X, Y and Z who are rated 7,8 and 9 for example, is BAD LOGIC because it presupposes the rankings that it sets out to prove.
    In other words, you've already DECIDED who ranks where and then you pretend you're reasoning objectively to come up with your number 1 !
     
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    #6
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,235
    Feb 15, 2006
     
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    #7
  8. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,033
    Sep 5, 2004
     
    ironchamp, Jan 10, 2008
    ironchamp, Jan 10, 2008
    #8
  9. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    They both rank outside of the top 10. I don't think they come close to being widely considered better than either Frazier, Foreman or Liston.

    Whilst they were good, they weren't that good. They probably rank about as high as a guy like Ken Norton.
     
    Jack, Jan 10, 2008
    Jack, Jan 10, 2008
    #9
  10. Nemesis

    Nemesis Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,650
    13
    Dec 9, 2005
    no higher
     
    Nemesis, Jan 10, 2008
    Nemesis, Jan 10, 2008
    #10
  11. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    Foreman was strong and powerful and all that, but Walcott was a better boxer.
     
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    #11
  12. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,113
    25,279
    Jan 3, 2007
    What do you consider as being GOOD LOGIC? I'm curious as to how you go about making your ratings while avoiding the bias trap.
     
    mr. magoo, Jan 10, 2008
    mr. magoo, Jan 10, 2008
    #12
  13. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,235
    Feb 15, 2006
    A Foreman Walcott fight would be in no way a foregone conclusion.
     
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    janitor, Jan 10, 2008
    #13
  14. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    Louis was more dominant and active. Not really Ali's fault that he had the Vietnam-break, but it happened anyway. Look up Louis' record, after winning the title it's gigantic string of KO.. KO... TKO..KO. Also, Ali lost to a prime Frazier but beat him when Frazier declined (of course Ali wasn't at his peak either) and according to most here (not me), Liston was far past his best for the Ali fights.
     
    ChrisPontius, Jan 10, 2008
    ChrisPontius, Jan 10, 2008
    #14
  15. Sonny's jab

    Sonny's jab Guest

    Saying that fighter A must be number 1 because he beat B, C, and D who are 7,8 and 9 is clearly not logical, but it is being presented here as not only logical but as something that is OBJECTIVE and not mere opinion.

    That's what I'm responding to, the claim that those ratings are written in stone and not debatable.

    The last thing in the world that I'd argue is that we can be completely objective and somehow come up with the "correct" ratings. It's that kind of thing that I'm arguing AGAINST.
     
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    Sonny's jab, Jan 10, 2008
    #15
Page 1 of 7