Maybe I'm finally admitting it

Talk about a thread hi-jack.

 

It's those Louis fanboys Bujia.They won't let anything go

 

Says the guy holding on to a blood grudge seven decades after Nana got donkey-punched. :bart

 

Robinson is the best on film fighter from an offensive perspective.

 

What´s wrong with beeing a hipster?

Bob Fitzsimmons: Middleweight champion of the world, heavyweight champion of the world, light-heavyweight champion of the world
Ezzard Charles: heavyweight champion of the world

Yes, Bob Fitzsimmons accomplished more.



Robinson is probably the best ever, yeah, but there are others in the same tier, he might shade them by a c*nt hair though. Charles, Duran, B. Leonard, Gans, R. Leonard, Langford. And there are plenty of others who are close to that like Armstrong, Walker, Napoles, Louis, Ali, Pep, Moore, Canzoneri and on and on. Don´t know about guys like Fitzsimmons, McFarland, Greb and perhaps Young Griffo since there is no or not (good) enough footage of them.



Joe Louis was one of the very best ever. Period. People who disagree with it have an opinion you have to respect but it´s still a stupid opinion to have.

 

Louis as an offensive force is an absolute dynamo. He ranks. High. Probably top ten. Depending on the day(referring to Schmeling II, Baer) probably top 5.

Louis on defense was flawed as hell, and his phenomenal, nigh on divine combination punching, power, and accuracy made this hell to exploit. Still, he has quite a few. His defense is not even close to all time great caliber defense.

Boxing is about both. He's a top class fighter, but a top 10 pound for pound? p4p is a tricky thing to argue, but I can see many ATG pure boxers handling him if they didn't have to contend with his outweighing them by 50 pounds, and we've seen Louis struggle with those styles.

Not trying to knock a stud and a legend, as he earned his spot atop boxing history. But damn near everything he had, he had on the punching other guys end of the spectrum. Getting punched back was something he struggled with stopping at times. If he didn't, he's a heavyweight Robinson without the feet and the creativity.

Great fighter, not the #2 best fighter ever. That honor just does not go to Joe, great as he was.

 

yeah, probably.

 

Agreed. RJJ and Leonard are up there though.

 

Hearns is a nightmare for anyone.

 

Ray Robinson was the complete package, Willie Pep the best pure boxer. They rate high on the lb4lb scale for me but so do Greb, Moore,Charles and Duran....SRR was 128-1-1 before the Turpin fight and had quite a resume but still had many spectacular KO's and wins against top rated ATG's...he is up-there with the best...Ali was a great fighter but no-where in my top 10 LB4LB

 

So how exactly do you get to 25 title defenses, face top level competition for 17 years and come on top more often than not by an overwhelming margin without an all time great defense? NO fighter lasts that long on the world level without at least a very very good defense. If you were to ask me who had a better D between Louis and Robinson, I'd say Louis.

He just wasn't as durable.

 

I greatly appreciate the way Louis slipped and parried punches, his compact hand positioning and his minimalist ability to make punches miss by an inch, and subtle use of footwork to avoid being in a vulnerable position. His defence was excellent most of the time, I reckon.
I mean, yes, he got hit by guys who weren't in his class overall, and was sometime careless or reckless or just plain sloppy. But Robinson and Armstrong also "got hit too much" if you view them with a critical eye. All three had offensive ability that sometimes probably inhibited them on defence. Usually they applied ample defensive know-how though, hence their remarkable records.

I've read similar criticisms to yours of Louis applied to Robinson, with the valid comments that his durability and offensive arsenal and sheer fighting ability compensated for often loose attention to defensive details.
For me, Louis and Robinson had excellent great defence.

Super-elusive guys like Willie Pep and Benny Leonard had better defensive abilities and styles. They elevated their defense to an art above that of their attack. But that doesn't make them better.

But that's just my opinion. Clearly you see far more flaws in Louis than I do.

 

Louis's defense wasn't too bad fundamentally but he did not have the defensive instincts of a great defensive boxer. His parrying, blocking, even the occasional upperbody movements and subtle footwork were all fine but the problem as with Mike McCallum for example was that he did not always see the punches coming, especially when coming from a boxer with fast hands. Louis feasted upon the big, slow guys who could not hit him solidly.

To use McCallum as an example again, we would have probably seen him floored more often than he was if he was less durable. Because he wasn't, he gets recognized for his textbook defensive skill.

 

thanks mr. psychiatrist

:nut