"Joe Louis Not Great"

Louis wrote in his autobiography that he was really pissed off when Walcott upset Charles,because he knew Walcott would not entertain a 3rd fight with him.

 

Knowing what we know now, I would probably favor Walcott in a third fight!

 

So why did 90% of the boxing world predict Wlad to dispatch Fury with ease? You picked Wlad to beat a top talent like Joshua 2 years later so you clearly knew he was still operating to a high level at 39 like most others did.

Louis is a cop out answer since he was 36 against Marciano and had a far harder career than Wlad.

Wlad was at the peak of his power at age 36 , shortly after he beat Haye. His fanboys all claimed him to be in his absolute prime when he was the same age as Louis in his last ever fight - thats another example of why age does not = prime.

When exactly was Wlads prime , when he was getting blown out by Sanders and Brewster in his late 20s?

No , Wlad was a late bloomer and perfected his jab n grab style with was integral to his success as he got older. He performed at 39 exactly how he performed at 34 and onwards.

It was an old mans conservative style he used to win so many title fights. It wasn't down to his athletic ability , endurance and workrate , rather it was down to shutting down the activity to a pace he was comfortable with and preventing the opponent from working in close with excessive holding enabled by corrupt officiating.
That illegal style of boxing was blown apart by Furys size , strength , inside game and multi dimensional switch hitting movement.
Wlads complete lack of any success against Fury suggests no version would ever have been able to solve him.
I asked you to to name an opponent as fleet footed as Fury and you couldn't because Wlad has never beaten anybody who presented the awkward angles and zig zag movement Fury did.
Wlad simply is no good against an opponent that can move. Thats why he could barely land a thudding punch on Haye and was lost against Williamson - on route to a loss before he lucked out on a cut that ended the fight.

Pastor was more agile , had better movement and was quicker on his feet than Haye. He was also far more skillful. Louis cut him off and knocked him out , Wlad couldn't knock score a knockdown against Haye . If you were consistent you'd hold Wlad more accountable for the flaws you are bashing Louis for , because Wlad would not be able to track down and stop guys that moved like Pastor or Conn.

If Vitali Klitscko fought movers he'd have a knockout ratio somewhere in the low 20's.

 

Arguing that two fighters are at an equal stage of their careers, simply because they are the same age, is highly disingenuous.

It is the kind of argument that you would forgive a novice boxing fan for using, but in a more experienced one you hold it as a mark of mischief.

 

I am not trying to knock Holmes, just defend Louis. Holmes had an excellent career.

I have read that Louis had an injury against Conn in their first fight.

 

Look at Joe Brown & George Araujo over at the lightweight thread. Makes your point.

 

The same poster who contends that states O Brien was past his best when he boxed Johnson,though they were born the same year.

 

Louis did not mention it in his autobiography.He said he was concerned that coming in at 200lbs+ he would be seen as the bigger guy, the bully, so he ate very little the day before the fight and cut out liquid to get below 200lbs at the weigh in.He said that having done so , he felt like ****.

 

Answer best given, Walcott deserved to win the first fight! So there was a re-match.

Walcott was good enough to get the first fight, certainly better than many of the bum of the month types. I think we all agree on the two above points.

Louis boxed exhibitions, over 100 of them while in the USA Army. Boxing was his job. Actually Louis boxing in the army deserves its own thread. Believe it or not, he was troubled at times in the ring.

Did Louis break his hand vs Farr? It sounds like a bit of an excuse if it was just a sore hand. Boxers deal with that all of the time. Farr never won a match in the USA, I read he was robbed in the Braddock match.

 

You don't know Walcott deserved top win the first fight because you have only seen edited highlights of it. That is the problem!
Farr admitted to my Dad," Looey beat me", but he was convinced he beat Braddock. Bottom line Louis was not the same fighter when he came back from the War, and Walcott was a better one,he had a stable environment,regular diet and training facilities,and shrewd mobbed up management.

 

Mcvey,

Jack O'Brien had 180 recorded fights when he met Johnson. It's not only the chronical age that makes a fighter past his best, the total amount of fights factor into the equation as well. Let's be honest.

Post the draw with Jack Johnson May 1909, O'Brien only won 3 of his last 9 fights!!!! He was finished by January 1910. Doesn't that fit the very definition of a fighter who was past his best?

Do you view it any differently now?

 

I know 66% of the media people who saw it live felt he did on their score cards.

I know the audio of the crowd says he did when the decision was announced, and Louis had the body language of the loser. MSG was Joe Louis' house of boxing.

I know Walcott is the better on the existing film. If your dad saw Louis vs Walcott 1, he'll likely tell you the same thing.

Was Louis at his absolute best for Walcott 1? Hard to say. He was 33, and two fights before this in about 6 months time. Joe looked good in some matching during WW2 fight, worse in others. Its a pick and choose type of thing.

For example, Louis struggles with Pastor, Scheming, Godoy, Farr, and Braddock well before he was in the army.

Was Louis fighting better competition post WW2? Absolutely yes. Perhaps a reason why he struggled, but he was only 27 years old for the first Conn fight. Hard to argue he was past his prime by for that one.

 

I believe you mean chronological, and it was you that pointed out Louis and Walcott were near the same age.Louis was nearer the end of the trail than Walcott ,that is patently obvious.Louis was barely competitive with Charles whom Walcott split 4 fights with and ko'd once . Bottomline despite what Bob Dylan says in "Lay Lady Lay", you can't have your cake and eat it too! O Brien was likewise nearer the end than Johnson but be consistent!

 

Stop ragging on old time heavies!!

 

Special needs man forgets Louis was inactive during the war years, typical