Larry Holmes vs Joe Louis? 15 rounds

I think Larry takes this on points but will have a few rough moments. His size, mobility, chin and jab will see him through...it does somewhat seem like a comparison of Apples and Oranges. Both ruled the division but the division was a much different landscape for both men. I'm thinking each would be the best they'd ever faced...by a long way.

 

Similar to him vs Norton I assume, I still prefer Holmes to win tho.

 

Joe Louis is all wrong for Holmes, Larry can move and jab a bit, but Joe would stalk and use his powerful jab and unload the powerful right hand. Joe was a great finisher and had a tremendous left hook, but it would be the right hand of Joe Louis that would be the kryptonite. Shavers had a great right hand but had stamina issues, once the brown bomber hurt you it was basically over. Joe Louis by KO from 1-10 rounds, I see 6-8 Louis by KO

 

Well said,,,,,,my mind says Holmes by decision, but I saw Larry get clipped many times by less artful assassins than the Brown Bomber ,and if he hurts Holmes this ain't Renaldo Snipes thrashing about but one of the premier finishers in boxing history.

 

Louis didn't fight in Norton's style anyway, so not getting the comparison.

 

Mostly every top Heavyweight has visited the canvas though Louis was knocked down by Galento and Braddock and was on the floor 10 times himself overall.

I mean Ali was decked by Cooper, Banks, but yet he would still be the favourite over Louis if you asked the majority of boxing fans.

I'm not saying Holmes is as good as Ali but I definitely think Holmes has one of the most troubling styles for Louis to overcome.

 

Here's round 2 where "static" Louis repeatedly traps a fresh Conn on the ropes and beats the **** out of him.

This content is protected

He struggled with Conn because the dude ate headshots like the T-1000, wasn't slowed down by body punching (at least not until very late into the fight), had insane stamina, hand speed and infighting ability.
Louis was landing on Conn repeatedly but Conn was giving back plenty of his own, it's what made the fight thrilling. This wasn't a case of Louis being unable to catch up to an opponent while getting beffundled and outpointed. Most of the fighting was done at close range as Louis was constantly on top of Conn.

And Louis as he did against Baer, Carnera and Braddock. Why are we pretending that fighting on the back foot was a novel concept for Louis?
Or are you suggesting that going on the back foot would have helped him trap Conn more easily?
Both guys were versatile counter punchers that changed their approach depending on their opponent.

Because the guys who tried that approach got pummeled to unconsciousness. There isn't a single heavyweight with a record against "mover-boxers"/ "out-fighters" as good as Louis's.
With 8 wins and 6 knockouts against Lee Ramage, Bob Pastor, Billy Conn and Jersey Joe Walcott, Louis comfortably sits on top of Liston, Foreman, Dempsey, Marciano, Frazier and Tyson in that regard.

Not only would Holmes be slower than Louis but he'd be using tactics Louis would be well familiarised at dealing with.
I don't disagree that Holme's ability to fight while retreating would be beneficial, I just disagree to what degree it would benefit him. I'm especially against the assumption that it would shut down Louis' offense.

Which you were wrong about. He did go after Conn and they fought intensely. Conn stuck around because he had incredible durability, stamina and volume punching to prevent Louis from completely taking over, as mentioned above.
And let's not overstate Conn's points lead, he was ahead in an otherwise very close fight.
Btw, at the same age Louis was putting men like Conn out for the whole count, Holmes was busy getting points wins over Tom Prater and Roy Williams.
And before you tell me that at 27 Larry was not prime, Louis had just fought 6 title fights in 6 months leading up to the Conn fight and had dehydrated himself to reduce the weight discrepancy.

The reports you heard were bogus.
You can find Conn's weight fluctuation leading up to the Louis fight on boxrec. He was fighting at 175-183 lbs during his heavyweight campaign.
I made a post about this last year:
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/conns-real-weight-for-the-first-louis-fight.712498/

If you're interested, skim through it and read what @SolomonDeedes had to say on the matter.

I just showed you the Ocasio fight where Holmes is obviously as slow as Louis when fighting on the front foot.
Conn found success fighting in bursts on the inside, not by out jabbing Louis. I don't see how Holmes having even more reach would affect this.
30+ weight advantage is irrelevant. Holmes could come in at 230 lbs and his punches still wouldn't have anywhere close the impact of Joe Louis's, and if Conn could take body and head shots from Louis, he can take them from Holmes, unquestionably. I don't even see how this can be controversial.

Did you seriously just bring up Holme's knockout stats in a discussion comparing him to Joe Louis...?

Yes, Holmes could hurt Conn, that's not what I'm disputing. I think Holmes was an underrated puncher and I think he was a better boxer puncher than he was an out-fighter. I don't consider it disrespectful towards Holmes to say that he didn't have anywhere close the power or finishing ability of Joe Louis.

I think the inverse shows utter contempt for fighters who proved they could overcome massive size and power disadvantages, especially in the case of Conn, who did it against an opponent who outclasses Holmes.
You previously mentioned Tommy Farr, Goody and Braddock as examples of why Louis wouldn't be able to off Larry in 6, but when someone mentions that the lighter hitting Holmes would perhaps not finish Conn, he must be blinded by nostalgia?
What nostalgia? The fight happened in 1941, how old do you think I am?

And somehow Conn isn't good enough to replicate the results of titans like Ernie Shavers and Lucien Rodriguez?
Or is Holmes magically going to hit harder than Louis because he has girthier love handles?

It's fine to think that on average heavier guys will beat equally good smaller guys, but here you have a specific case of a smaller guy far surpassing the durability of his weight class and you just ignore it.

Of course Louis was world class by 22, my point wasn't to discredit Max Schmeling's victory, my point was to show that Holmes didn't have to suffer such crushing defeat because he started fighting such opposition after the age of 27, when Frazier,
Ali and co where more shot and washed up than the HMS Hood.

 

This is a really tough matchup, gun to my head I'd pick Holmes for a hard fought SD win in a real war.

 

Louis didn't recuperate because Schmeling landed 20 right hands before the knockdown and 60 rights after. He didn't give Louis the chance to fully recover, but Joe did recover in bursts before being hurt again.
Implying that Shavers is going to repeatedly outplay Louis like Max did is hilarious.
And yes, Louis would get up from a Shaver's bomb, the same way he got up from Buddy Baer's left hook.

 

Where did I imply the underlined?
So you think Buddy Baer and Shavers' power was comparable?
BECAUSE I DONT!

 

There’s no doubt in my mind that Joe Louis could crack !!! But he didn’t move his head at all came in / a straight line ..,. Larry Holmes via tko probably around rd 13 … if Louis had fits with tiny Billy conn then I don’t know how he’s gonna handle that piston jab !!!!!

 

Watch the entire fight and keep in mind this is a 37 year old Louis.

This content is protected

 

There's a Shavers in every era. In the 40s it was Buddy, 20 years before that they called him Godfrey and 3 years ago we called him Wilder. Ernie is perhaps the most mediocre slugger to have ever graced the ring. If you play a hypothetical Ernie Vs Joe scenario in your head and see any other outcome than Louis turning him into a carpet within three rounds, I don't know what to tell you.

 

@Pedro_El_Chef I had to quote you like this too many characters.

He struggled vs a fighter who was 174 pounds who would not be classed anywhere near a Heavyweight in the modern era end of. You can paint any picture you want to make it look better the fact is it was a poor showing from Louis and Conn was clearly outboxing him and troubled him with his movement.

No i'm saying Louis's feet were not that fast and at times he was static hence he would struggle vs Holmes movement, speed, reach, it's that simple.

Louis got knocked down twice by Walcott in their 1st fight and it's considered a gift decision for Louis so that's not really the best argument to use.

Conn was a Light Heavyweight and was outboxing Louis clearly again i don't think it's a good argument. If Louis is struggling that much vs a 174 pound Light Heavyweight with a 72 inch reach he's going to also badly struggle vs Holmes who also has good movement and a 81 inch reach.

Holmes is faster than Louis in regards to footwork and he's faster than Louis at range with the jab. Louis is a better inside fighter than Holmes and puts combinations together better on the inside. But Holmes would be using his longer reach and better movement to control the fight.

No i wasn't wrong Louis struggled with Conn's movement and he struggled to find him consistently that's why it took him 13 rounds to knock out an opponent who weighed 174 pounds. You're making out Conn has some amazing durability at Heavyweight comparing him to "T-1000" which is absolute nonsense. Tyson would've finished Conn within 6 rounds and many modern Heavyweight's would've stopped Conn far easier than Louis did.

Why do you keep bringing up age ? i've already told you Holmes had a late start to professional boxing at age 24. And didn't have a successful Amateur career so it took him a bit longer to come into his own what has that got to do with anything ?

Holmes dropped Ocasio with a jab and didn't lose a single round how that is a negative in regards to Holmes i don't know.

Of course reach would make a difference what ? so you're telling me a fighter with one of the best jabs of all time with an 81 inch reach wouldn't at all be effective vs a fighter with a 72 inch reach ?

You stated Holmes wouldn't be able to badly hurt Conn or finish him because he didn't have Louis's power. And i pointed out Holmes had 15 stoppages in 20 of his world title fights so i'm suggesting Holmes could definitely hurt the much smaller Conn and finish him. Yes Holmes may not hit as hard as Louis but i also don't think Holmes would have anywhere near the trouble Louis had vs Conn.

In your "opinion" Louis outclasses Holmes i don't agree because i think Holmes beats Louis and there lies the problem.

I mentioned those names because plenty of smaller lesser fighters have extended Louis past the 6th round. So i find it hard to fathom Louis is going to stop Holmes early who is considerably bigger, more durable, better skilled, than pretty much most of Louis's opponents.

Holmes doesn't hit as hard as Louis that doesn't mean he couldn't stop Conn earlier because i think Holmes matches up better against Conn and wouldn't struggle as much as Louis did.

And as i've already told you that's because Holmes didn't have a successful Amateur career and turned professional quite late hence it took him a bit longer to establish himself as world class.

You can't compare ages of fighters everyone's journey is different.

 

Are you saying Mercer & Williams had comparable jabs to Louis!?

Regarding Shavers hitting Louis, is there any particular reason to think Louis wouldn’t get up? I’m not saying he would definitively, but everything in his career points to yes. & if Holmes had never been knocked down by Shavers, we could look at his flooring by light-hitting Snipes & say he would never get up if Shavers hit him clean. Some things are just unknowable unless they happen.