Joe Louis + Tomato Cans = overrated legacy

It is no better than the contenders today, I have never heard of them. Joe Louis fought a lot of greats, Max Schmeling, Max Baer Sr, Jersey Joe Walcott, Primo Carnera, and James J. Braddock.

I have been around too long, it is called immaturity, a need for attention since their parents did not give them any.

 

Joe Louis was legendary, a fighter can only fight the opponents that are put in front of them, not from the past or future. Louis was active unlike a certain excuse making mad man champion that holds the WBC Title today.

 

But here's the thing...he defended his title monthly in an era of one world champion, and in an era where fighters made their money off the gate. As a result the top contenders often fought one another; they couldn't just sit around and wait.
So the top ten was constantly being recycled and repopulated.

 

Fantastic Post.

 

Joe louis is over-rated by many.

He does not do well H2H with most champions and was beaten by almost all the greats he fought ( Walcott( robbery) , Charles, Marciano, Schmeling) and was ran hard by a Light Heavy with Conn. His best win was Baer and that was because Baer broke his right hand in the second round.

That said he was a long term champ and fought everyone he could have and won many rematches. He was a ATG, but has been ridiculously overacted for decades.

 

Holding the Charles and especially Marciano fights against him when he was shot to bits is absurd. He was well past it against Walcott, and still avenged any moral loss

Are we going to start critising Muhammad Ali for losing Leon Spinks. who was nowhere near as good as those guys. too?

 

Those were the greats he faced. His early career performance was against semi great Braddock, Conn ( who was beating him) Aturo Godoy ( who probably should have won their first fight) Schmelling ( who beat him the first time by KO) and a bunch of C level fighters ( many had him on the canvas)

He fought who was in front of him and that is all good, but you cannot outright dismiss the losses to the other greats either.

 

It's dubious to count Walcott as a great, but not Sharkey or Baer

Godoy probably should have won? Given the full fight doesn't exist, I presume this is based on a solid bit of searching through the next day reports. Would you please share your full breakdown.

Louis gets more criticism for KOing Conn twice than most guys get for their losses.

How about John Henry Lewis, who was a much better Light Heavyweight champion than Conn? How about his easy win over top contender Lou Nova? How about him knocking out Primo Carnera?

And which C level fighters dropped Louis exactly?

Of course losses when he was shot to bits should be dismissed.

Are you going to hold the losses to Tyson and Holyfield against Holmes?

That leaves a loss to Schmeling vs countless wins over top contenders and champions

 

Can you tell who exactly those "C fighters" Louis fought? and let me educate you something, getting drop by "C fighters" does not effect your p4p greatness you idiot.

 

It tells you something about his chin and defense though. I guess only an idiot would see that.

 

What does it tell you about his chin and defense, that he went fifteen years without getting stopped?

They can't both have been bad.

 

Fighting at the highest level possible and facing plenty of powerful punchers without being stopped says that Louis had to have solid defense and chin.

Joe Louis was more durable than most HW champions.

 

Ouch. Louis was great vs non defensive statues BUT a man with skills gave him a tough night.

 

Which fighters fought 30+ top contenders or champions, and didn't have some hard fights?

Or not even that many, how many fought 10, and didn't have any hard fights?

 

The men he fought for the most part were only contenders in their time. It's not his fault, the economic color line was mostly in play. But recored vs the best he fought who were smaller men in general wasn't great and he struggled to win some of them and lost in others.