Joe Louis vs Vitali Klitschko

Sanders was never that good. Yet he obliterated Wlad. Completely destroyed him.

 

I have seen this thread before.

Look--Louis badly struggled vs the best boxers he meet. It's a fact. We have been over this. The films and scorecards do not lie. They agree with me.

If a new reader wants to learn why I can PM him or re-post it here.

Vitali in comparison to anyone decent Louis meet had a harder Jab, superior height and better power ( Let's leave Marciano out ). He was harder to hit and had a better chin. He was also nobody's fool and would not showboat or fight foolishly. Vitali forced his opponents to fight on his terms in almost all cases! No man won more than three consensus rounds vs. Vitali or floored him. Ever.

Louis low guard, slower feet much shorter height, suspect chin ( vs punchers for sure ) would have the bomber in over his head. Literally.

Vitali gets the job done a bit sooner than Schmeling did in the first fight with Louis.

 

I fully agree.

I'd also like to mention that Louis would be countered with that lean back straight quite a bit. I am very intrigued to see how Louis would react to those counters. I am not too sure his chin would hold up, as he was dropped by lesser opponents. For me, Vitali would win by stoppage through sustained punishment.

 

Agreed on the counter punching point. You are spot on.

Vitali, by the way, was decent on the counter, and could land from many angles, unlike Louis who needed his feet set and a certain range to be at his best.

Here were some points made a few weeks ago by me.


Joe Louis' scorecards vs the best boxers he fought.

Some believe Louis, who in my opinion and many others fought in a down era of boxing was a near perfect boxer. I'm not one of those who thinks that way because I have seen his films vs. men who in many cases were giving up height, and reach to him. Yet they had no issues landing on him. With the superior firepower power in all cases, if Louis was this master boxer type ( Offense and defense ) he should have dominated on the scorecards. Yet he was often floored or behind.

Let's add up the rounds were given to Louis vs the best four boxers he fought. To use a qualifier, I'll average out score cards given, and not penalize Louis for knockdowns in the round because back then there were no 10-8 rounds. In the case of Schmeling vs. Louis 1, I could not find score cards so let's say I'll be very generous and give Louis 4 rounds of the 12.

The best four boxers Louis fought in my opinion were:

Schmeling
Walcott
Conn
Charles


1. Schmeling-Louis and Schmeling fought a combined 13 rounds. Louis won but 5 of 13 rounds, and I'm being generous to Louis. Schmeling was thought to be passed his best for the first fight, meanwhile, Louis was coming off his best career filmed performance vs Max Baer.

2. Walcott vs Louis. Both men were the same age in both fights. 26 rounds fought, and an average of 12 of them went to Louis. The first fight was rather controversial and the second one, in my opinion, had Walcott well out in the lead. But I'm using the judges official cards since we have them.

3. Conn vs Louis. 21 rounds were fought. Conn looked terrible in the rematch and retired the same year, but hey that's part of it as Schmeling was thought to be passed his best in the first Louis fight. The score cards awarded 10 of 21 rounds to Louis on average

4. Charles. This time, it was Louis on the decline. 15 rounds were fought Charles stood right in front of Louis, who was on big time winning streak and still had his jab and power and whipped Louis badly. Louis won three rounds on average and, to be honest, that seems a little high.

Summary. Louis won just 30 of 75 rounds fought. This is just 40% of the rounds fought.

If the Walcott or first Conn match was 12 rounds, Louis losses. In fact, a large sample of those who scored Louis vs Walcott 1, felt Walcott won it by a near 2 to 3 margin, and the fight went 15 rounds.