Louis's chin couldn't stand up 2 their punches! Since they all hit harder! U put the top ten back then compared 2 now my $ would b on 2days heavy weights.
Pure speculation. The facts are that Gallento was one of the weaker top contenders of Louis's era while Chagaev was one of the stronger top contenders of this era. Chagaev is arguably the best fighter that either of the Klitscko brothers ever beat while Gallento is not a name that is brought up to showcase Louis's resume. Now if it takes sombody like Chgagaev from this era to beat Gallento then that reflects verry badly on this era.
This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected
Not really, These are fairly close to what the top five ratings look like according to boxrec right now, with only a few minor differences. And anyway, it was you who were making a broad statement about today's fighters being fat, when in fact, most of the best ones aren't. http://www.boxrec.com/ratings.php?country=&sex=m&division=Heavyweight&status=A&SUBMIT=Go I don't think it undermines anything at all. Chambers, Gomez, and Haye are all well over 6 feet tall and well over 200 Lbs.. Louis was facing men who were former light heavyweights in many cases. Agreed.
David Haye is not a #6 HW. Put Arreola in there who is better then Haye (More proven) and half of the other people on that list.
How is Arreola more proven than Haye? True, Haye hasn't beaten a top10 contender yet, but neither has Arreola. But Haye was undisputed CW champion and has an impressive record there, with a KO% of 96 or so. Given that cruiserweights weigh 210-215lbs on fight night, i think that carries a lot of value.
I'm 17 years old and my prediction was {For me Joe Louis wins this one Vitali has terrible technic and has never fought anyone in Louis class before except for the Lennox fight the only thing that gives Louis a problem is Vitali's size and long jab and chin but I pick Louis's greater class of skills to win this fight by decision or late fight stoppage. { I do agree that the heavyweight division in Louis's time was a poor era for the heavyweights but also think Louis was a briilant fighter } I don't agree with favourtism I believe we should be objective and base are opinions on what we see.
Well I'm in my 30s and Louis is one of my favorite heavyweights. That being said, I still predict a Vitali massacre.
And he looked excellent against Louis. He also looked very good against Faar who he beat after the Louis fight. His form and his performance speak of the world champion, not the journeyman, that's the bottom line. It's been explained fully; it should be clear by now. Louis was brought along very quickly, that's true. It's equally true that a two year pro with twenty five fights going in against a cagey veteran is a risk, that's the entire point and I think it speaks for itself. Of course it's a part of Schmeling's reason for being rated highly; take away any fighter's very best win and he will often tumble in the rankings. Well I don't; he was moved along at a perfectly reasonable pace. Louis is the anomaly here, not Kitschko, which is why he has the L. This is a lot of noise about a pretty simple reasonably standard argument - It's risky to match a two-year pro with an ATG veteran, yes in retrospect. I'm not knocking the matchmaking, it was standard for Louis, i'm examining the loss.
Obviously there are HW's that are not fat. Obviously there are more fat HW's in modern HW boxing than 1940's HW boxing.
Arreola is garbage and less proven than Haye. Walker/McCline/Witherspoon is worse than Mormeck/Barrett/Frago/Enzo.