Joe Louis V larry holmes

I will also ad, that as limited as Shavers was, his overhand right often landed on slick fighters and possesed the momentum to knock out or hurt just about anyone. Getting dropped by a right hand from Earnie, then coming back to win the match, was an attestment to Holmes' toughness. Its actually more of a compliment to Holmes than a criticism in my opinion.

 

it was not just shavers and snipes, Mike Weaver and Tim Witherspoon landed there right hands almost at will on holmes, they timed there rights after holmes jab with perfect executing the entire fight, holmes had no idea how to get away from weaver and spoons rights. Louis had the greatest timing out of any fighter i have ever seen, and he had better right hand than both those guys and better finishing abilities.


The only puncher holmes ever fought close to joe louis league was mike tyson, and tyson totally exposed holmes flaw in the 4th round of there fight, old or not.

 

Frankly, I can think of no puncher whom holmes ever beat that was in louis league, and the ones he did face gave him all sorts of trouble with right hands. Holmes even avoided some of the better right handed punchers of the era like page and thomas.

 

Weaver and Witherspoon didn't land right hands on Holmes at will, or all night. One of the reasons Larry was troubled against Weaver was he had the flu. Listen to him just after the fight, it's obvious he was sick. Against Witherspoon, Larry was blocking a lot too. Just because it comes near the face, doesn't mean it lands.

 

They'd both be in with the best fighter they'd ever faced. What's new?

 

Good points,

But it should be noted that many of the fighters you're illuding to were modern day black athletes who possesed great power and who's very best attributes involved the right hand. Yet, Holmes still managed to beat these fighters despite taking their best. The only reason I mention their being black, is because you often touch upon the fact that Louis did not always face the best black athletes of his period. In fact, he almost never did.. So that should counter your point about Larry not fighting all of the best contenders of his era as well.

While Louis was certainly a superior puncher to the likes of Shavers, Weaver, Spoon, etc. his style differed from the awkward defensive stance of say Tim Witherspoon. On the flipside, Louis was equally or more susceptible to quality boxers. While Holmes won all of his fights during his prime, Louis was Ko'd badly by max Schmeling who out moved and outclassed him. I know Louis was a tad green here, but we can offer only so much exception as he was unbeaten in 27 pro fights and coming off wins over at least two former world champs that I can think of. Louis was completely outboxed by lightheavyweight Billy Conn before catching up to him late. He was also floored by men who were grossly inferior to Holmes such as the light hitting Braddock who hadn't fought a single time in two years, and by Tony Galento among others.

Louis would have a chance here, no doubt. As I've stated before, I often go back and forth as to who would take this one. I will say however, that after weighing out Holmes' vulnerability to right hands, versus Louis's soft spot for slick durable boxers, the edge goes to Holmes from where I stand. Especially considering that Holmes always overcame his weaknesses during his prime years, whereas Louis sometimes did not....

 

Holmes UD.

 

agreed

Agreed partially. However, Rephrase your words. Louis did not face a decent quantity of top quality heavyweights like holmes did, but he did face the two best of the 1940s walcott and charles, and faced one of the best of the 1930s john henry lewis.

I do agree with this, but difference is louis lost 3 prime years 1943-45 because of the war, and theres no gaurantee that he would have taken on a couple of the top black contenders like lee q murray, bivins, or ray had given the chance to defend his title during these years. holmes on the other hand never missed a year, NEVER UNIFIED one belt, threw one of his belts in the trash rather than fight the mandatory, and didnt grant rematches in close fights like louis did.

Yes, but Louis himself was a counterpuncher, in the fact he waited till you made mistakes before he opened up.

Yes this is true, no exuses for the schmeling fight, he got beat. plain and simple. he did in the most savage beating in history avenge the loss with one of the best 1 round knockouts of all time. Louis did have trouble with boxers but holmes had some extrordinary problems with his top competition too.

no exuses, louis-baer was louis at his best

completley?? the fight was near dead even after 12 rounds, louis won the first 3 rounds and shut conns eye with his jab. Larry Holmes was outboxed by lightheavyweight michael spinx, so the same applies to both fighters.

holmes was floored and hurt badly by punchers who were grossly inferior to louis such as kevin issacs, and renaldo snipes. Tony Galento was the david tua of his era, he hit much harder than holmes and fought out of a crouch at 5'8, much different from a 6'3 standup boxer.

disagree. holmes did not overcome his weaknesses, he simply chose to fight green competition and avoid the dangerous fights/rematches that would have exposed his flaws time and time again. Louis gave rematches after flaws were exposed, and corrected them so the 2nd time he destroyed his opponent. holmes never rematched opponents and never corrected his flaws.

 

Fair enough, however facing a mere 3 African American fighters in a title reign stretching 12 years and 25 title defenses is rather thin in my opinion, especially considering the talent pool of young black fighters at the time. Additionally, of those three black fighters, one of them defeated Louis ( past his prime ), while another was arguably robbed in his first meeting with Joe, and the last was a lightheavyweight. Frankly, I think facing Lem Franklin in place of Abe Simon might have been a better opportunity for Louis to desolve the color line, as well as fighting a more worthy opponent.

I'm not sure that I would label the time frame between 1943-1945, as being part of Joe's prime years. Louis looked the most impressive from about 1935-1940ish. But, that's subject to opinion. As for Holmes failing to give rematches in close fights, I agree that this was true. However Louis arguably gave rematches to fighters who I don't feel deserved them, nor even deserved receiving a title shot to begin with. The Abe Simon/Lem Franklin example is one that I would like to once again refer to.

And I agree that if Holmes got sloppy or careless, he would be made to pay for it. However, if he was focused the entire evening ( a likely scenario against an all time great ), Louis would be waiting an awefully long time to counter, during which he may end up eating a lot of leather.

Ironically, it wasn't always his top competition that troubled Holmes. He usually faired well against some of his more revered opponents. It was normally the unknowns like the Weavers, Witherspoons, Snipes', and Williams who gave him all he could handle, which makes me inclined to believe that he rose to the level of his comp. A potential problem for Louis.

Actually, Louis was behind on two of the judges cards going into the 13th round of the Conn fight, and according to the recent Louis documentary, Joe was losing legitimately. At the end of the fight, Conn jokingly said to him " I was winning, why couldn't you just let me take it? " As for comparing Louis's performance against Conn to Holmes outing with Spinks, I think we both know there are some key differences here. Holmes was two months shy of his 36th birthday and still lost in a fairly close effort. I will also go further by saying that Spinks was a better lightheavyweight than Conn was, but again that subject to opinion.

Kevin Isaac fought Holmes when larry had all but 6 pro fights. Granted Isaac had only 2, but still. I don't think we can use this fight as a berometer for how anyone would have done against Holmes as a champion years later. As for Renaldo Snipes dropping Holmes as well as some of Larry's other close calls, can you honestly say that these men were dominating him? Holmes was kicking Snipes ass for most of that fight, and as soon as he got careless against Renaldo and got a slap on the hand, he woke up and started pounding the **** out of him. Louis was staggerd by Galento in the first round, then dropped in the fourth. And besides, I really have never taken a specimen like Galento very seriously, nor his record against quality comp for reasons that I have been through on a multitude of occasions.

Being the David Tua of HIS era, did not make him David tua period..

There may be some merit to these criticisms, however I will say that I disagree with the claim that he avoided the dangerous fights of his era. Cooney, Shavers, Witherspoon, Berbick, and Smith were probably the biggest punchers of the early to mid 80's, and while he never fought Page or Thomas, there were reasons other than just cold feet as to why those matches were never made. Probably comparable to some of the political reasons that prevented Louis from fighting men like Turkey Thompson, Lem Franklin and Elmer Ray, etc.

In ragards to denying rematches, I agree that Holmes probably should have granted certain guys a second chance. However, just as much as Holmes should have given rematches, Louis gave second opportunities to fighters that he probably shouldn't have..

 

Louis was being out boxed by a great boxer in Billy Conn(one of the best Lightheavys ever but he did KO Conn 2 times) Holmes lost to Spinks....Louis lost once young and 2 times Old, still he defended his ittle 25 times and had a record of 68-3. Also Louis fought the best in his times and defend and rematched the best. All of the good Black fighters that Louis did not fight he beat the men that beat them, John Henry Lewis, Tony Galento, Bob Pastor,Patsy Peroni, beat a lot of the good black fighter that louis did not fight...Holmes avoided the best right hand punchers, Weaver,Thomas,Dokes,Page,Coetzee,Big John Tate and Holmes did not unify the crown and he could have made good money doing so.....Louis fought everyone and if you give me 2 names he did not fight that were deserving look at there records and see that the Brown Bomber beat someone that beat them

 

That was a very fine post. Thank you.

 

Are you going to tell the rest of the story here, or should I do it for you? Spinks was an undefeated dominant lightheavyweight champion, who barely decisioned a near 36 year old Holmes. Louis was in his prime, and almost outboxed by a lesser fighter in Conn. Let's not build this comparison up to be something that it isn't.

Louis lost once young when he was 27-0 and had wins over two former world champions, not to mention a rather extensive amateur career. The man he was brutally KO'd by, spent most of his career at lightheavyweight, was off for a full year, and had only won 4 of his last 8 fights. The green card does not work much here as far as I'm concerned. As for two times old, you may as well ad the first fight with Walcott, as he was floored multiple times, and recieved a decision that he probably shouldn't have. Additionally, you might want to credit Holmes with his win over Ray Mercer and galant effort against Evander Holyfield, when he was far past the age in which Louis had retired...

Well, the next time I'm looking for a good prime select steak, I'll be sure to visit this thread, because there is more bull**** here than any cattle ranch I've ever visited. Louis gave two title shots to Abe Simon, but never fought Lem Franklin who beat him twice, and right around the same time that Simon got his shots. Additionally, While Holmes never gave rematches, at least he was fighting men who were worthy of the get go, whereas, Louis gave undeserved rematches to men who never deserved a title shot to begin with.......

This quote has already been well refuted......And besides, if your're going to take the approach that Louis defeated men who beat fighters that he didn't face, then why not extend the same courtesy to Holmes? Did Holmes not defeat Weaver and Berbick who beat Tate?. Did Holmes not defeat Berbick and Witherspoon who beat Page? Hopfully, you get my point, unless you wish to continue picking on only the points that better suit your argument.

 

the shot shavers hit him with was scary ...now think if he was in there with a guy who could catch him with 3 or 4 of those in a session ..then what happens? ..

 

How many other guys can you think of who hit like Shavers, and could hit him with three or four of those punches with the same velocity?

 

Toss a coin, there's not much in it.

Holmes will be hurt, probably at a handful of various times. The question for me is can he survive? Louis is an infinitely better finisher than Shavers and co. Holmes fighting when hurt is not to be scoffed at either. He also has enough power to get Joe's respect. I think Holmes might be narrowly outpointing Joe excepting KD's, which if achievable. might actually even up the scoring.

My feeling is a razor thin decision either way or possible Louis stoppage. I very narrowly lean toward Holmes over the distance or Louis if there's a stoppage.

Pick'em