Joe Louis Vs. Wladimir Klitschko

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiTXye62mAY

(I kid, I kid.)

 

But they do have some important differences. Carnera was up on his toes a lot, and was actually a lot more agile than Vitali (to the detriment of punching power). His jab wasn't an arm punch like Vitali's, either -- he leaned too far forward from the shoulder. A slow, clumsy, higher-commitment jab that allowed him to slip inside. He had a decent outside hook that he could sometimes use as well. (Vitali is more a straight puncher). This worked with Primo's style, since it allowed him to grab and maul his opponent with the uppercut. His stance was squared more often than Vitali's. He also retains elements of late 19th century boxing -- the outside forearm block, the overly narrow legs. I think that Primo instinctively worked against some of his training. He realized that he needed a firmer base and the ability to throw his opponent around on the inside.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1QA7Q1hOA0

(there's also some training footage that Elroy asked for)

Vitali, by comparison, is more like volume-punching Hamed with a back injury. He stands in a more bladed stance than Primo's, and he pivots a lot from his waist like it's a ball bearing. His left hand is always busy. Primo's was not. Vitali's game is about keeping the fight at long range and pecking away. He controls that range with clunky footwork, leaning back, a busy left hand, and a high output of weird punches that destroy an opponent's rhythm.

Primo's was about switching between long range (he had an okay, if unimaginative jab, and an okayish left hook) and inside mauling. He used much more mobile footwork, a squared-up stance, and a high-commitment cumbersome jab as his main tools to switch between those ranges. I think he cared more about being "comfortable" than Vitali does -- long range was reasonably quiet, and he could control most guys on the inside. What he didn't like was intermediate punching range.

EDIT: Though when a tall opponent didn't allow him to play at either range, Carnera was liable to get uncharacteristically nasty, deepen his stance, and go for left hooks --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl370ZWpvcQ

 

Because Ward has a 100% winning record versus better opponents than Conn's opponents and because Ward has a much higher KO percentage.

 

SRR. :deal

[yt]KUYhjX64pDo[/yt]

[yt]t2zHb_ho0ZY[/yt]

 

Very nice breakdown. I was speaking of their general style, but your details are appreciated. My point being more that Hits didn't possess a wider variety of skills than Primo. Certainly he's better, but not so much better Louis couldn't exploit many of his flaws the same way his did Carnera, Baer and Simon. It seems many of the arguments against this are purely based on size.

 

Better opponents? Thank you for proving you know nothing of boxing history. How many wins does Ward have at 175 over top comp? I won't even bother with Conns wins over top middle weights and heavyweights.

 

My point is: the heavyweight division has always been said to stink and each successive era is worse than the previous eras, which I think is patently untrue. By the time I get to Marciano and Walcott eras hopefully more respect will be given to the current division by the fans who follow the sport.

 

The top middle weights and heavyweights Conn beat couldn't cut it today. They were bums. They had losses. They had been KOed. They had glass jaws, they couldn't punch. That's going by the same criteria people analyze the current state of the sport. People have a selective memory when it comes to comparing boxing past to boxing present. They remember the old timer's highlights but don't take into consideration those highlights were against poor opponents and they all together forget the low moments of the old timer. While the current athletes are closely scrutinized and judged more on their losses or low points. Some simply don't analyze different eras equally. I won't get into the quality of Conn's opponents because I'm busy looking at the quality of opponents throughout each previous generation of heavyweights and that's a lot of work.

 

This is a thread about Louis and Wlad, not eras. See my other thread for a better education.

 

Like j said, thank you for showing you know nothing about boxing history, Conn or his opponents. :good

 

Thank you- unexplainable fight-
Sanders had so much potential

 

Yes, it showed in the Nate Stubbs fight!

 

After Chambers was wobbled by that punch , what did Wlad do? He went straight in for the clinch:rofl
He did the same to Haye, Wach .. Pretty much everybody he fights.

20 clinchs against Mormeck in the first round. Mormeck! What a joke.atsch

He Tried to clinch the **** out of Brewster but was told to fight and ended up getting turned over before the 6th round.

Wlad is nothing without holding. A blown up Bum.

 

After Chambers was wobbled by that punch , what did Wlad do? He went straight in for the clinch.

Its right there in the video. Chamber is up against the ropes and Wlad clearly reaches out and grabs him.
You post the video of it happening and then claim it didn't happen?

You are thicker than two short planks.