Joe Louis vs. Muhammad Ali

Very true.

 

what does Joe say in 1976 about younger Ali? Did he think he was much better than the one in the 70s? Thanks.

 

I'll dig it out tomorrow, it's from Boxing Interntaional magazine. But he basically says he would have trouble with the young version because of the movement and would much prefer to fight the one that beat Foreman & Lyle.

 

:rofl

 

I pick Muhammad Ali to convincingly beat an average, going-through-the-motions Joe Louis, but a focused version with a gameplan soundly beats Ali. If anyone wants me to go into more detail, I will.

 

Joe Louis, with his regular activity (for such a high profile fighter), could easily become complacent and careless. After he became sold on his own abilities, you only saw the real Joe Louis in rematches. He fought to impress as he was coming up, but got too confident after he started thrashing everybody. Schmeling beat him, which was a wake up call, but Louis avenged it convincingly and again became overconfident. Myriad challengers would give him mild to severe trouble when they shouldn't have done.

That Louis, who was purely a professional doing his job and nothing more, would probably get his arse handed to him by Muhammad Ali.

But the focused Louis? The one who entered rematches with a concentration rarely equalled, with a gameplan and fists ready to explode? It would be a completely different story.

The gameplan is the vital factor. Louis had all the tools necessary to beat Ali, but he wouldn't get by on those physicalities alone; he'd need to channel his strengths and execute his moves perfectly. This is Ali.

Ali had a quality jab and it worked wonderfully against fighters who lacked such an extension, but he didn't like being jabbed in return. It was all about his rhythm; like a drummer, Ali was a rhythmic performer. There are advantages and disadvantages to this type of fighter - he could string together some brilliant combinations using a basic 'beat', but that beat could be interrupted by a quick spontaneous attack. Such as a jab.

Louis' jab was arguably the most well rounded of all heavyweights'. It was certainly quick and straight enough to catch Ali off guard, providing he combined it with the next technique:

Glove blocking and parrying. Louis was adept at this skill, albeit against lesser opponents. With emphasis placed on using it however, I'm confident he could be trained to use it effectively against even Ali. Louis' reflexes probably matched Ali's (although it wasn't as obvious because he was less flash and more consummate) and could catch him out often. And once you nullify Ali's jab, that's a massive chunk of his game taken out.

There are other various improvements that a vengeful Louis would possess - such as the ability to cut down the ring. Ever seen Louis skip? He was surprisingly agile. Don't be fooled into thinking he was slow; it was just part of his usual method to pace himself and 'shuffle.' You can bet that a rematching Louis, having been perplexed by Ali's jab in the first fight, would also be keeping up that left hand.

So what's my prediction? Louis by late stoppage. Many will scream 'blasphemy' I'm sure, but I'm trying to think logically. Ali was a very durable fighter with a variety of survival techniques at his disposal and determination in abundance - but Louis was arguably the greatest hitter of all.

George Foreman likely hit with more raw power than Louis, but he didn't possess the same speed or technique. It's the volatile punch you don't see coming that knocks you out, not the clubbing shot that you have a split second to prepare for. Louis' punches would not move the heavy bag as much, but they would create more velocity; they'd travel through the air quicker and 'stab' the target rather than push it. Ali would have a hard time seeing these more direct punches.

After all, Ali was stunned far more against Henry Cooper and Joe Frazier than he was Foreman, and for those very reasons...

... Except Louis had a much more varied arsenal of punches in his repertoire. Where Frazier would hook Ali, stunning him, then hook him twice again from the same side, where Ali would now be defending from, Louis would hit him with a right, then maybe another right, then dig a couple downstairs. He was just a more complete puncher than Frazier, who could often be called 'predictable.' Against Ali at least, Frazier was all about landing the left hook. Every punch was Joe Louis' best, and his greatest strength lay in stringing them all together.

This focused Joe Louis, who may very well be able to cut the ring down on a dancing Ali, might just close the show with a well placed barrage. Single left hooks from Frazier were stunning Ali badly, but he couldn't follow them up. Also remember that this focused Louis, who was more careful and reserved (but still even more explosive and opportunistic than normal), would likely be far less hittable and grabbable than a lunging Foreman or plowing Frazier.

It wouldn't be a whitewash, not by a long shot. Ali might even be leading on the cards - but I expect Louis to take the fight in spectacular fashion. His eye would probably be busted and he'd have had to go through hell to get the win, but he'd do it (after losing the first fight).

 

I totally agree. Ali too big, too fast, too strong and too tough. Ali was not a great puncher but nonetheless was a damaging one. Loius' suspect chin (decked by Schmelling, Buddy Bear, Galento - for God's sake! et al and badly rocked by such 'punchers' as Billy Conn and Tami Mauriello), poor defence and slow footwork would have made him an easy target for Ali. Joe was a great puncher (probably the best pound for pound in the h/w division) but Ali could take a shot like no other fighter. He was also the expert on tying up fighters. You just were not going to catch him with combos no matter how fast your hands were. I believe that he could take Joe's shots - remember he was 20+ pounds heavier than Joe.

 

It seems to be taking into account a peak Louis vs a sloppy Ali- who's won the first fight already.

 

Ali UD15 in a great matchup.

 

I'm assuming Ali is at his peak as well.

 

Good observation. I agree entirely on Louis, but I tend to favor the 1973 Ali after losing to Norton. The loss made him more focused, serious about conditioning and sharpened him up better than any of his prior fights after returning to the ring. He was also naturallly stronger and more fluid than the 1960s Ali. Even tho' the weight was approximately the same (212 lbs. against Norton in the second fight and 211.5 lbs against Folley), Ali looks bigger and stronger in 1973.

The 1973 Ali was also less harum scarum in defense, not just relying on fast footwork and jerking his head back to avoid punches, but pacing himself, mixing up smooth footwork with sly clinching, holding and steering of his opponent to dictate the pace of fights.

Occasionally ESPN will show Ali vs. Norton 1 and 2 back to back. It's really interesting to see how much Ali adapted and improved, while Norton fought the same fight and was gradually worn down in the rematch.

 

I agree with you Joe Louis fists knew no granite chin. Braddock, Baer, and Galento had never been stopped before Joe Louis. If he caught the young Ali with a fierce combination Ali doesn't get up. Remember what Henry Cooper did to him Joe would do it worse.

Louis 13th round KO.