Joe Louis vs. Arturo Godoy I

A few caveats. The rounds are not complete. One round is missing entirely. The film is not the clearest, and it is sometimes difficult to see if a punch lands cleanly.

That said, I had Louis winning easily. I scored rounds 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 for Louis. Rounds 3, 8 for Godoy. Rounds 7, 9 even. My score is 10-2-2 for Louis.

Godoy was very brave, very tough and very strong. If I were scouting for gridiron football, I would pick Godoy over Louis as a lineman. He seemed able to push Louis back into ropes and corners. But while effective at smothering Louis at times, and at making Louis look confused, he didn't show much offensive ability. When he got in close, his attack was mostly ineffective mauling and slapping, or just clinching. Over at box rec there is a next day newspaper report which lauds Godoy for making Louis look bad, but has these lines summing up Godoy's effort:

"Godoy is harmless. He could hardly punch himself out of a paper bag."

Louis, though, was not that ineffective. He scored with his jab at a distance, while Godoy was content to bob low and not throw punches. I don't remember Godoy trying to get to Louis with an overhand right. Louis caught Godoy coming in often with left hooks or right uppercuts. This didn't stop Godoy who walked through them to get close for his mauling act. There is a film on you tube of Godoy being interviewed in Spanish a day or so after the fight. His left eye is swollen shot and the entire left side of his face is badly puffed up. Louis appeared to come out of this unmarked. It was Louis who did the scoring.

While I would be willing to go Contra Mundum with my scoring, it is I think in line with the majority scoring of this fight. Two of the three officials had it 10-5 for Louis, as did the New York Times and the International News Service. The AP had it 9-6-1 for Louis. Box rec quotes most of the ringside reporters as favoring Louis. (one judge did have it 10-5 for Godoy, and UPI had it 5-5-5)

So an unimpressive showing for Louis, though certainly not a "robbery" but rather a solid decision win.

As for the fight as entertainment, it is an interesting watch, and Godoy seems to have been a character.

 

If you score a round even, then that suggests that a reasonable person could have sored it for Louis.

Robberies are unjustifiable decisions, not fights with lots of close rounds.

 

That goes without saying, but it still doesn't meet the criteria of a robbery.

 

That is not a particularly unlikely scenario, if the person doing the scoring, favored a variable that Louis was strong on.

Then you have the question of whether some of the other rounds could have gone the other way.

A robbery in my eyes, is a decision that falls outside the bounds of reasonable interpretation.

Having said that, I always wondered why Louis's detractors never made more of this fight!

 

To me, a robbery is a fight that shouldn't be scored for a fighter. Not one that can't.

Distinct difference.

 

I think when you have incomplete footage, you really have to weigh up a combination of the footage and ringside reports. Editing a fight to make it more interesting can really skew things.

 

With any fight you get a certain spread of opinion.

If we all scored Hopkins Calzaghe sincerely, you would get some very different cards, and they might all be more or less reasonable.

Therefore I do not call a fight a robbery, just because I disagree with the result.

My test for a robbery, is that I try to score the fight for the winner, as far as I can without being unreasonable.

If I still can't do it, then I am looking at a robbery.

If I think that the decision fell within the bounds of reasonable interpretation, then it is not a robbery.

 

In the pre fight medical check, the doctor commented that it was the first time that he checked over a Louis challenger, and not detected signs of anxiety. Godoy was one of the very few challengers, who was not scared of Louis. He had not come there to lose!