Joe Louis V larry holmes

You can probably put a scenario together where each one can beat the other.

Young Holmes (i.e. Norton fight) loses.

Holmes replaces Billy Conn and wins.

Holmes replaces Max Schmeling No 2 loses like most everybody else because Louis was in an extremely p.o.'ed state of mind.

 

Yeah, like Ossie Ocasio and Marvis Frazier for example! Not to mention Ali, Scott LeDoux or David Bey. Holmes also fought some undeserving challengers while ignoring the real threats - also i don´t think there was any real threat for Louis´ reign till he got old.

 

It's a real tough pick where arguments can be made either way with a lot of merit .. I'm just not sure on this one at all ...

 

louis has a good chance ... he sent many men to the hospital with his shots ...

 

I pick Louis but there's a lot of nonsense anout Holesm being written here.

yes, he had a flaw for right hands... everyone tried to exploit it, but in his prime nobody could. I believe Louis could and would get a win here but this criticism is being vastly overstated.

And wasn't Pinklon Thomas a left handed figther who fought orthadox with basically a weak right hand. A big nosie was amde about the Weaver KO but Mike was worn out and always a bit chinny to start with.

 

Mistake

 

The answer is yes. Pinklon Thomas was not a fighter known for his right hand, but for whatever reason, certain posters are listing Pinklon as being among some fabricated list of right handers that Holmes avoided.

Every fighter has a weakness of some sort. The difference between a good fighter and a great fighter, is that a great fighter manages to win regarless of his shortcummings. While Holmes may have been vulnerable to right hand attack, he still managed to win all of his fights during his prime, while taking on many talented right hand sluggers. Patterson for example was prone to getting knocked out by big punchers who were larger than himself. Foreman had a soft spot for slick durable boxers. The difference is, Holmes WON his fights despite his weaknesses, whereas those men didn't. Frankly, I don't see the logic in claiming that because he had the tendency to get tagged every now and again, that its a given for some all time great to beat him. I am an even bigger fan of George Foreman than I am of Holmes. Foreman was one of the most lethal right hand hitters of all time, yet still I'd pick Holmes to beat him....

 

Absolutely agree...

And let's not forget that when Holmes fought Bey, bey was coming off a win over Greg Page the man Holmes was supposed to have avoided.

Holmes was picking his challengers later on and he did go for some soft pay days but he still won them all until Spinks. Lewis lost to his softer options, Tyson was stopped by Douglas and Holyfield dropped one to Moorer.

Like you say Holmes had flaws but still found a way to win.

I still pick Louis but this is a close fight.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Conn was an ATG and Louis KO'd him 2 timesWho was better Conn or Spinks tough call but Louis still KO'd Conn 2 times and Holmes lost to Spinks was the 1st fight a clear win for Spinks YES 2nd closer yes..

Holmes had a good win over Mercer but so did Jess Furgeson,Holmes did well in his losing effort to Evander and Louis did vs Charles but Louis also had good wins in comeback over Bivens,Brion,Salvold(WHO STOPPED LEM FRANKLiN)

Talk about bull**** Lem Frankln was beaten by Tony Musto (who was KO'd by Louis and Eddie Simms(Simms was KO'd by Natie Brown(who was KO'd by Louis and John Henry Lewis(who Louis Ko'd in 1 and Simms was Ko'd in 1 by Joe Louis...Abe Simon lost a decision to Franklin but but came back with a stop over Walcott and Eddie Blunt and Franklin was KO'd by Lee Savold later on the Savold was KO"D by Louis....

Holmes did NOT fight these avoided guys when the IRON was HOT he did not unify when there was MONEY to be made or when the others held titles or were rated highly. These would have been good money fights, Holmes gave up a title rather than fight Page......You are really Streeetchinggg

 

Joe would have stood in front of Larry for too long and he would not have been able to ship the punnishing jabs and handled the movement either. Larry was a masterful boxer and had a solid right hand that he put over that jab. Joe was a great finisher , but he had to get Larry into position to hurt him.. 9 times out of ten Larry would have hurt him badly.. and probably put him away.

 

You're still ignoring the fact that Holmes was 35 when he fought Spinks, while Louis was 28 in his first fight with Conn. Additionally, you called the second Holmes-Spinks fight close, when in fact it was a clear robbery. As for Conn being better, I seriously doubt it. Only 4 light heavyweight title wins as opposed to Spink's 11. Only 15 Ko's in 65 wins. Twelve losses, to Spinks' sole loss to a prime Tyson? Not to mention Spink's claim to becoming the first lightheavyweight champ to take the heavyweight crown.

Are you genuinly familiar with the circumstances of those fights, or are you just digging up boxrec results? Mercer injured himself prior to facing Ferguson, but said nothing to his people, because he was already signed to fight Riddick Bowe. Halfway through the match, he was cought on tape trying to bribe Jesse to throw the fight in the center of the ring. When Holmes fought Mercer, Ray was in perfect health, unbeaten in 18 fights, and coming off career wins over Morrison and Damiani ( both great fights if you've seen them. )

CONCLUSION: Attempting to downplay the value of Holmes' victory over Mercer by stating that Ferguson beat him as well, is a rather lame tactic. Especially given that you are clearly unaware of what was going on at that time....

I think that in the world of boxing, there is a big difference between 36 and 42, plus the position of being a defending world champion as opposed to being the challenger, but whatever.

So your new position is that it was okay for Louis to deny Franklin a shot on the basis that he defeated men who beat Franklin in hindsite? Because if these are the rules that we're playing by, then why don't I just mention Holmes beating the crap out of David Bey shortly after Bey beat Page? By the way, Lem Franklin defeated Jimmy Bivins, and never even fought Cesar Brion. He was also past his prime when he lost to Savold.

Before you bore people with your connect the dots games, why don't you try looking at something a tad more relevant, such as the time frames in which these fights occurred, and Franklin's accomplishments in the division during Louis's reign?

Franklin turned pro in 1937. For the first two years of his career, he struggled, and suffered a number of losses, but this was not uncommon for a young black fighter with no managment and limited amateur experience in those days.

Now, between 1939-1942, Franklin went on a winning streak that was 19-0-0-17. These wins included victories over Abe Simon, jimmy Bivens, Eddie Blunt, Curtis Shepard, and avenged losses to Tony Musto and Eddie Simms. If you ask me, that's one hell of a winning streak, and frankly I don't think Louis fought very many fighters who were coming off of such a good run. In March of 1942, just 5 months after Franklin had creamed the crap out of Simon, Abe gets the title shot.

Truth is, Franklin was black, and most of the best black fighters of the period were past over. At least Holmes can't be accused of picking and choosing opponents on the base of race.

I think you've done more than your fair share of stretching on this topic, and frankly I think it has reached ridiculous proportions. The Page and Thomas fights were never made due to politics that were not so cut and dry in terms of who was at fault. If claiming that Holmes was a fighter who's heart and courage should be held in question, then I'd say you've basically summed up your credibility on the issue.

 

Talk about strectching...Holmes did not rematch Weaver,Witherspoon or Williams...Holmes did not fight co-champions Weaver,Dokes,Page,Coetzee,Thomas,Tate and lost a title refusing to fight Page....

AS far as Lem Franklin, he did have a good run from 1940 to the Febuary of 1942 where he was KO'd in 8 by Bob Paster then went on to lose 8 more fights and was KO'd 6 times out of those 8 he lost 8 out of his next 10 fights....Joe Louis fought the BEST of his era, did not Share a title with anyone...Rematched the toughest opponents Walcott, Conn,B.Baer,Gody and made 25 defences and if you check the records most of the fighters he beat BEAT the best meaning they deserved a shot...buy the Way Bob Pastor was one of them

 

This has been done to death, and you continue to disregard the explanations that posters have been typing here for over a year now. I'll try and go through this one more time with you.

John Tate and Larry Holmes were in the process of negotiating a unification match when Tate was KO'd by both Mike Weaver and Trevor Berbick in the same stretch of 3 months. Tate then fell off the face of the earth. Holmes and Coetzee had already signed to fight each other, when Coetzee ( not Holmes ), backed out of the deal.. Dokes never lasted long enough to build momentum for a title unification. Carl Williams never got a rematch due to Holmes losing to Spinks in his very next fight, then Williams got blasted by Mike Weaver a year later. Witehrspoon and Weaver deserved rematches, but its not like he lost to those guys in the first place. Page and Thomas were primarily victoms of promotion politics.

You just described Greg Pages career to a " T ", following his loss to David Bey.

Erm, maybe that's because there weren't mulitple aplphabet titles, and if there had been, perhaps some of those belts might have been held by some of the black fighters that Louis never faced....



Rematched the toughest opponents Walcott, Conn,B.Baer,Gody and made 25 defences and if you check the records most of the fighters he beat BEAT the best meaning they deserved a shot...buy the Way Bob Pastor was one of them[/quote]

Giving Walcott a rematch and beating him convincingly the second time was great credit to Joe Louis, but guys like Conn and Buddy Baer were never that good to begin with. Baer had a brief moment where he sent Louis over the ropes in their first fight, but Louis creamed him. A rematch was hardly necessary.

 

ALL OF THE TOUGH BLACK FIGHTERS YOU MENTIONED WERE EITHER BEATEN BY JOHN HENRY LEWIs (who was KO'd in 1 rd by ) stopped by Tony Galento or Bob Pastor, all opponents that Joe Louis defeated and there is a BIG difference in the way Joe Louis conducted his Rein as Champion and Larry Holmes in his in regard to rematches and fighting the BEST

 

When in the hell did Lem Franklin ever face John Henry Lewis or Tony Galento? Additionally, the Pastor loss came following Franklin's impressive winning streak, and right after the Simon win ( for the second time ). Again, you're using hindsite to justify Louis passing up a dangerous opponent, yet you don't apply the same philosophy for Page losing multiple fights after Holmes had ducked him, then defeated a contender who beat page..See how this works? After Ko'ing Simon in early 1942, compiling a 19-0 run, Franklin shouldn't even have been in the ring with pastor. He should have been training for Joe Louis, but of course Simon recieved an undeserved rematch at the title, and Franklin didn't.

Get your facts strait.

I would also like to ad Elmer Ray to the list of black fighters that certainly could have recieved a title shot in the 1940's. Yeah I know, you're going to tell me how John Henry Lewis with over 100 pro fights, defeated Ray when he had all but 7 matches, right?