Marciano-I Just Don't Understand It

I agree his left hand was his money punch when he came back,it set up everything.

 

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/charles-v-these-80s-heavies.643493/#post-20284254
I had just watched Louis - Charles yesterday for another thread about Charles vs. 80s heavyweights. Another poster attached the Louis - Charles fight and I could only watch a few rounds because Louis looked so diminished and he looked like he didn't want to be there. He couldn't even shift his weight with punches and he couldn't take advantage of openings. Louis looked worse in his 30s in that fight than Foreman, Holmes, or Holyfield looked in their 40s...I compared the way Louis looked to Cleveland Williams in the Ali fight. It's hard to judge how Charles or Ali performed because their opponents were so diminished that they were little more than heavy bags.

Someone mentioned that the Louis of the Charles fight would beat Michael Moorer? Besides Moorer being a 220 pound southpaw, Moorer was quick and strong and he could punch. I'm glad that fight couldn't happen. The Louis of the Charles fight would have no chance of winning against Moorer and he'd be lucky if he didn't get seriously injured.

 

having lived through that period myself and being in college at the time, most fans and sports commentators weren’t flattering him.

 

Louis had 10 fights in his comeback and scored 3 stoppages one was a cuts tko [Beshore,]another a tko over a journeyman [Walker]who was stopped 10 times.The only ko he scored was over Savold, who was as used up as he was.

 

Hipsters & fanboys are the only people who pick Marciano over Foreman, Ali & Holmes.

 

I’m not trying to make comeback Louis to be any kind of great fighter. He wasn’t, but I think the Charles fight made him look a lot worse than he actually was. Charles was a fast fighter like Billy Conn. the kind of fighter that would have caused him a lot of trouble in his prime. Only difference was he couldn’t catch up with him like he had earlier been able to do versus fighters like Ramage, pastor, Conn and Walcott who presented Charles like qualities. But even when he fought Ezzard, Louis was still beating up on other men pretty good.
from 1948-1950 joe fought another 19 times in 1948 (including bouts against Arturo Godoy, Billy Conn and Jimmy Bivins that were certainly competitive), 36 times in 1949 ( including bouts with Curtis Shepherd, Elmer Ray, olimio Agramante, bill Gilliam, Nino Valdes, Rex Layne, Tommy Flynn, Johnny Shkor and Roscoe Tolles) and 24 times in 1950 (including bouts with Pat Valentino, Clarence Henry, Nino Valdes, Henry Hall) You can dismiss them as mere exhibitions but guys were knocked out by Joe Louis here. Some were 10 round no decision contests. Louis dominated these opponents.

I don’t think George Foreman was capable of this kind of dominance during his comeback.

 

Foreman was 7 years older when he came back and had been retired for 10 years!

 

I think one thing we have learned over the years is that older fighters need to put on weight and concentrate on muscle rather than make a weight. Back in Joe Louis day- Joe sometimes was as high as 230 + for exhibitions but when he had a fight that counted on his record he always trained down to his normal weight range - they didn't believe in weight training - Marciano threw rocks and Dempsey did the wall pulleys but for them it wasn't natural especially with the 15 round mentality. Joe Louis was not near his prime when he fought Marciano but still very smart and experienced and winning his fights pretty easily

 

Precisely. Joe Louis was able to target the new number one guys in the division. George never did.

Sure Moorer had the belts, and Evander had the belts.. but the number one in the division was not those guys at that time. George sure was Not targeting Lennox Lewis and Riddick Bowe. And was wise not to. Foremans comeback is rightly celebrated as successful because he didn’t.

Joe Louis might have been shown up by Rocky and Charles. And this reflects how this comeback is measured. But it would have been the same for George if he really took on all comers and aimed for the best in the division as Joe had.

 

When it comes to picking H2H winners I don't care about names or who a boxer beat, or if they are in the HOF, considered ATG, or ranked, a fighter is only as good to me as he looks on video. Fighters often take fights on short notice, when they aren't training, when they have substance abuse problems, when they have personal problems, when they need money, etc. They aren't machines and they aren't always at their best. If Joe Louis could beat a fighter looking like he did against Ezzard Charles, then my first thought is that the other fighter was not that good at that time. IMO, Joe Louis looked like he had lost his muscle tone, his reflexes, and even his motor skills in the Charles fight. I don't know anything about his personal life but he moved like an old man, like a person who had a substance abuse problem, he couldn't even shift his weight to punch. I don't think the problem was Charles' ability, EC was just in the right place at the right time.

I remember one time when I was about 13 years old doing a round with a guy who was in his 40s. The guy apparently had been good at one time, and people thought he was just going to work with me. I was prepared to get a boxing lesson. But not training and the easy life had caught up to him, he was slow and weak. He was much bigger and older so at first I was cautious, then I realized he didn't have anything left. I took it easy on him, but he knew, and he was glad when the round ended. On a higher scale, that's how Louis looked against Charles.

IMO, Louis looked like a shot fighter in the Charles fight.

 

Louis fought a collection of non punchers when he came back. Why people are comparing a 37 years old Louis with a 10 years retired 44 years old Foreman rather escapes me?

 

Louis had been retired for 2 years when he fought Charles.with regular work and bouts he recaptured some of his timing,but he would never be The Brown Bomber again.

 

Foreman came back in 87 the top ten was.
Spinks

Tyson
Holyfield
Witherspoon
Thomas
Williams
Berbick
Rodrigues
Biggs
Weaver
Rather different from the likes of;
Agramonte
Brion
Walker
Savold
Beshore

 

Yes and how come, including Rodriguez, Foreman fought no key players in that top ten?