Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

TheGreatA · Oct 29, 2009

The Mongoose said: ↑

I doubt Byrd's defense aggravated the injury as Vitali committed to precious few left hands during the course of the fight, save for a few short hooks to the body that he became more and more hesitant to throw as we can assume the injury grew more painful.

I thought Vitali was excellent in the first two rounds, putting Byrd in some hairy situations, slipping his counters, and scoring with some accurate rights. He became less effective as the fight progressed but he was still controlling the fight and making adjustements to Byrd's surprise aggression mid way through the fight. Its an interesting performance I think, especially for an injured fighter against a slick southpaw.

That said, I think Vitali had much better performances against Hide and Donald.
Click to expand...

On film it seems that Vitali used his left quite a bit more than that.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6QaHOpaJfQ[/ame]

Even in the very last round of the fight he throws it frequently:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoOM53COFMo[/ame]

KTFO · Oct 29, 2009

lefthook89 said: ↑

2) and your point is??

3) vitali, is far from possessing mind-boggling skills let alone being perfect. he's very clumsy, gives up his height ALOT, and this amazing footwork and combos you speak of i haven't seen it, all i see is slew-footed, somewhat stationary plodding and lazy arm punches. his style has many holes in it, its just that this current batch of HW's aren't good enough to exploit them. well, except lewis, sanders and byrd.
Click to expand...

2) The point is that Vitali fought and beat real contenders with decent style and ranking.

3) Exciting style and effective style are two different pairs of shoes. Vitali does what is necessary to win a fight - favourably by KO/TKO. Why wasting stamina when you got the tools to gain a win by KO/TKO? And Vitali dafoenantoly got that tools. If Vitali wasn't one of the best superheavies then who is it? There are no others than his brother Wlad, retired Lennox Lewis, and the giant Valuev. Please name other 'superheavies' who got an effective style.

Seamus · Oct 29, 2009

janitor said: ↑

We have just provided you a detailed analysis with suporting film footage suggesting that he dosn't really do andything that Primo Carnera didn't do back in the 30s.

Would you like to atempt to provide your own counter analysis or is your position so obvious that no evidence is required?
Click to expand...

Your analysis just doesn't speak of anyone who has spent a lot of time around the sport. Sorry to be so critical but those non-internet types I propose this comparison to just laugh. And at least one of these guys was boxing in the 50's, another was a sparring partner for a couple world challengers in the 60's, so these guys aren't too far removed. So, you keep crowing over this "analysis" but I have seen nothing remotely convincing, though it may be buried a dozen pages past.

In my opinion. Vitali does a much better job at controlling range and tempo. His jab alternates between space maker and range finder and switches these roles rather seamlessly. All in all, his punch selection seems far more educated that Carnera's and does more to dictate the action, the spacing, the tempo. The right hand is truly the ultimate persuader here. Add his generalship and toughness and you get a combination that makes for a far superior fighter than what I have seen of Carnera on film.

McGrain · Oct 29, 2009

Two days away and you boys add three pages

Seamus said:

In my opinion. Vitali does a much better job at controlling range and tempo. His jab alternates between space maker and range finder and switches these roles rather seamlessly. All in all, his punch selection seems far more educated that Carnera's and does more to dictate the action, the spacing, the tempo. The right hand is truly the ultimate persuader here. Add his generalship and toughness and you get a combination that makes for a far superior fighter than what I have seen of Carnera on film.
Click to expand...

That's about right.

I think you need to add Vitali's flat out belief in himself though. I haven't seen footage of Carnera boxing that makes me feel he had that. I do agree with those that say Klitschko likes things done his own way but I think he has a great deal of belief in his tools for making that happen.

As far as his ability to match with Louis goes this is relevant because anyone who gets in there with doubt is going to be found out pretty brutally. But I would like to add that you can find a great deal out about a fighter when he is matched with a genuinely great who also happens to be a great puncher - we've never got to really find out about Vitali unless you want to count his fury at the Lewis fight being stopped. That's Vital's one brush with the top-line, after all.

janitor · Oct 29, 2009

KTFO said: ↑

2) The point is that Vitali fought and beat real contenders with decent style and ranking.

Click to expand...

Louis actualy fought 34 contenders who were curently rankled by ring magazine.

The number that Vitally has fought can be counted on the fingers of one hand and most of them were not ranked for verry long.

3) Exciting style and effective style are two different pairs of shoes. Vitali does what is necessary to win a fight - favourably by KO/TKO. Why wasting stamina when you got the tools to gain a win by KO/TKO? And Vitali dafoenantoly got that tools. If Vitali wasn't one of the best superheavies then who is it? There are no others than his brother Wlad, retired Lennox Lewis, and the giant Valuev. Please name other 'superheavies' who got an effective style.
Click to expand...

Carnera.
Click to expand...

janitor · Oct 29, 2009

Seamus said: ↑

In my opinion. Vitali does a much better job at controlling range and tempo. His jab alternates between space maker and range finder and switches these roles rather seamlessly.

Click to expand...

Lets have a look shall we?

In the second Sharkey fight Carnera is clearly using the jab as his primary tool of the fight to score points using his footwork to keep Sharkey at range or coming forward.

He tends not to use his jab as a rangefinder but hooks off the jab a couple of times. When did you see Klitschko do that?

His countrol of the range would have to be deemed flawless in the sense that he is nearly always either able to hit Sharkey with the jab or uppercut. He is simply not letting Sharkey fight at the range he wants to one way or another.

All in all, his punch selection seems far more educated that Carnera's and does more to dictate the action, the spacing, the tempo.
Click to expand...

What is apparent with Carnera is that he is making Sharkey fight his fight here and he is up against a much more versatile and determined oponent than Vitally usualy faces.

Carnera is using his range and footwork to keep Sharkey at range when he can and when he cant he switches to an inside attack instead of holding onto Sharkey like a frightened child onto its mother. You talk about punch selection but Carnera is clearly making better use of hooks and uppercuts. While he looks clumsy at times he always seems to have the right punch to catch Sharkey when he gets past the jab whether it is a hook, uppercut or cross.

In all he shows much better footwork and better infighting ability than Vitally.

The right hand is truly the ultimate persuader here. Add his generalship and toughness and you get a combination that makes for a far superior fighter than what I have seen of Carnera on film.

Click to expand...

I would agree that Vitally is tougher than Carnera and probably hits harder as well but that is not what we are debating. I would say that by this stage of his career Carnera had polished his ring generalship considerably.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trEGY-q_IFA[/ame]
Click to expand...

mcvey · Oct 29, 2009

janitor said: ↑

Lets have a look shall we?

In the second Sharkey fight Carnera is clearly using the jab as his primary tool of the fight to score points using his footwork to keep Sharkey at range or coming forward.

He tends not to use his jab as a rangefinder but hooks off the jab a couple of times. When did you see Klitschko do that?

His countrol of the range would have to be deemed flawless in the sense that he is nearly always either able to hit Sharkey with the jab or uppercut. He is simply not letting Sharkey fight at the range he wants to one way or another.

What is apparent with Carnera is that he is making Sharkey fight his fight here and he is up against a much more versatile and determined oponent than Vitally usualy faces.

Carnera is using his range and footwork to keep Sharkey at range when he can and when he cant he switches to an inside attack instead of holding onto Sharkey like a frightened child onto its mother. You talk about punch selection but Carnera is clearly making better use of hooks and uppercuts. While he looks clumsy at times he always seems to have the right punch to catch Sharkey when he gets past the jab whether it is a hook, uppercut or cross.

In all he shows much better footwork and better infighting ability than Vitally.

I would agree that Vitally is tougher than Carnera and probably hits harder as well but that is not what we are debating. I would say that by this stage of his career Carnera had polished his ring generalship considerably.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trEGY-q_IFA
Click to expand...

Janitor ,you and I have had a long debate about Carnera, with both of us remaining entrenched in our original views ,but I have to say Carnera showed a marked improvement in this fight.
Carnera demonstrates a good judgement of distance ,good footwork [for his size ] and he controls a man who is several leagues above most of the fodder Vitali has feasted on.I only put this vid up as a counter to Mendoza saying Carnera was not a skilled jabber ,I think it proves he was ,and a bit more besides.:good
Click to expand...

janitor · Oct 29, 2009

mcvey said: ↑

janitor said: ↑

Janitor ,you and I have had a long debate about Carnera, with both of us remaining entrenched in our original views ,but I have to say Carnera showed a marked improvement in this fight.
Carnera demonstrates a good judgement of distance ,good footwork [for his size ] and he controls a man who is several leagues above most of the fodder Vitali has feasted on.I only put this vid up as a counter to Mendoza saying Carnera was not a skilled jabber ,I think it proves he was ,and a bit more besides.:good
Click to expand...

It is indeed curious that despite our different assesments of Carnera, we both understand the mechanics of how he worked.

I think that many of the people who are most dismisive of him in this context havnt even tried to understand his style.
Click to expand...

Unforgiven · Oct 29, 2009

Must be the longest Classic Forum thread ever. :good

I think we'll all have a much better idea of how Vitali Klitschko would cope with a fight against a fighter the caliber of Joe Louis after he takes on Kevin Johnson.

KTFO · Oct 29, 2009

janitor said: ↑

(1)
Louis actualy fought 34 contenders who were curently rankled by ring magazine.

The number that Vitally has fought can be counted on the fingers of one hand and most of them were not ranked for verry long.

(2)
Carnera.
Click to expand...

(1) The resume of both fighters isn't necessarily important for the result of that matchup - it's their styles and effectiveness. But again: f.e. Max Schmeling wasn't an ATG, but managed to floor Louis. With Vitali's current style ('plus' hight advantage) I can't see what Schmeling could do better than Vitali.

(2) Not Carnera. Read Seamus post. The entire package/combination of skills/advantages is by far better than Carnera's. Nothing more to add.
Click to expand...

djanders · Oct 29, 2009

I like Vitali. In today's group of heavyweights he has proven himself to be the 2nd best heavyweight boxer on the planet.

If we could get Primo Carnera and Vitali Klitschko in the ring together, it would be a close fight...also in my opinion. I suspect Carnera's heart would win the day against Vitali, but it wouldn't be an easy fight for either of them, and really could go either way! I would bet on Primo, but not heavily.

Vitali against Joe? On THAT one I would bet VERY heavily on Joe!!!

janitor · Oct 30, 2009

KTFO said: ↑

(1) The resume of both fighters isn't necessarily important for the result of that matchup - it's their styles and effectiveness.

Click to expand...

Of course resume is important.

If you judged fantasy fights purely based on how a fighter looks and his style, without taking proven acomplishments into account then you could make a case for Andrew Golotta beating any heavyweight who has ever lived.

It is only when a fighter has passed the biggest tests out there that you can seriously talk about him beating all time greats.

But again: f.e. Max Schmeling wasn't an ATG, but managed to floor Louis.
Click to expand...

Max Schmeling is generaly regarded as a great heavyweight. Many people have him ranked in their top 20.

If you want to pick his record apart outside of the Louis fight it is still much better than Klitschko's.

With Vitali's current style ('plus' hight advantage) I can't see what Schmeling could do better than Vitali.

Click to expand...

You obviously can't see verry much at all.

Louis strugled against shorter fighters and somtimes against fighters who countered him at mid range.

He absolutely devoured taller fighters who tried to stand off and hit him at long range. No such fighter ever achieved anything against him.

Vitally's height and style are not an advantage here. They arehis downfall.

(

2) Not Carnera. Read Seamus post. The entire package/combination of skills/advantages is by far better than Carnera's. Nothing more to add.
Click to expand...

I have not only read Seamus's post but I have also presented a detailed counterargument.

That puts the ball squarely in your court Im afraid.
Click to expand...

dezbeast · Oct 30, 2009

Janitor, seeing as no one who dismisses your Vitaly/Carnera comparison seems to have taken upon themselves to see if what you say has merit, I'm going to go ahead and analyze some of Carnera's fights and get back to you. Now keep in mind that I'm a pretty big Louis fan so there is no reason why I wouldn't want to agree with you.

janitor · Oct 30, 2009

dezbeast said: ↑

Janitor, seeing as no one who dismisses your Vitaly/Carnera comparison seems to have taken upon themselves to see if what you say has merit, I'm going to go ahead and analyze some of Carnera's fights and get back to you. Now keep in mind that I'm a pretty big Louis fan so there is no reason why I wouldn't want to agree with you.
Click to expand...

I would value your input. Perhaps you can find some details that I missed.

I think that Carnera improved his game somewhat between the first Sharkey fight and the second Sharkey fight after he came under the tutelage of Abe Attel.

He became better at fighting big and using his ring generalship.

KTFO · Oct 30, 2009

janitor said: ↑

Of course resume is important.

If you judged fantasy fights purely based on how a fighter looks and his style, without taking proven acomplishments into account then you could make a case for Andrew Golotta beating any heavyweight who has ever lived.

It is only when a fighter has passed the biggest tests out there that you can seriously talk about him beating all time greats.

Max Schmeling is generaly regarded as a great heavyweight. Many people have him ranked in their top 20.

If you want to pick his record apart outside of the Louis fight it is still much better than Klitschko's.

You obviously can't see verry much at all.

Louis strugled against shorter fighters and somtimes against fighters who countered him at mid range.

He absolutely devoured taller fighters who tried to stand off and hit him at long range. No such fighter ever achieved anything against him.

Vitally's height and style are not an advantage here. They arehis downfall.

(

I have not only read Seamus's post but I have also presented a detailed counterargument.

That puts the ball squarely in your court Im afraid.
Click to expand...

Resume can be helpful, but it's not important. Next example would be Douglas/Tyson. Douglas had a very inconsistant career, but managed to upset Tyson. Schmeling may be a great HW for hardcore fans, but he'll always be 'the man who floored Louis'. If he didn't achieve that nobody would consider him being an outstanding HW. Boxing fans are very peculiar regarding that point.

Just because Louis did well against some taller fighters doesn't mean that Vitali would automatically lose this matchup. Louis' weakness was the def after throwing a jab. Vitali's jab-cross-combos are tailormade for Louis' style.

What you call 'counterargument' is just hot air and loads of posts without any meaning. Too bad you got exposed.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

KTFO Guest

Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

mcvey VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

KTFO Guest

djanders Boxing Addict Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

dezbeast Active Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

KTFO Guest

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

KTFO Guest

Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

mcvey VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

KTFO Guest

djanders Boxing Addict Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

dezbeast Active Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

KTFO Guest