Should Louis have fought more than two black men in his 26 title defenses?

I can turn that around and ask the same question and close the case just as fast.

Some of those guys were highly ranked both leading up to the war and at its end. I think Elmer Ray was right around #1 for a brief period at year end 1946 while Franklin was #2 at year end 1941. Granted I agree these rating were brief and didn't last. But making the generalization that all African American heavyweight ratings were the product of the war doesn't exactly hold water.

 

Actually I have seen Thompson fight. He was slow, sloppy, had a porous defense, bad footwork, and he telegraphed his punches. He fought a lot like s**** iron johnson.

When did I say ALL african american heavyweight ratings were the product of the war? I said quite specifically that some you are putting up as champions of your argument were mediocre at best their high standing illustrated that the war had depleted the division. Thats a simple fact. The characterization that these guys were "prevented" from challenging for the title and that Louis somehow SHOULD have fought them is ridiculous. The reason that several of the men you listed had a high standing was because of the war and it was also because of the war that Louis couldnt/didnt defend against them. No war means a deeper division and likely an absence of their presence in the ratings or at least a much shorter period (which in the case of several was already very short). This is illustrated by the fact that most were rated when the division was weak and conveniently started to lose and drop from the picture after the war.

Now, go watch some films of Thompson and tell me how he its a shame Louis never defended against him...

 

You said it yourself, YOU THINK ray was rated #1 for a BRIEF period at the end of 46. Well, guess what? He lost that ranking to Walcott and Louis defended against Walcott. Where is the beef? Franklin was rated #2 AT YEAR END 1941. But at the beginning of 1942 he lost to Pastor, who Louis had already beaten twice, and lost his ranking. Where is the beef?

Talk about holding a guy to a ridiculous standard. The simple fact that these guys had more pigmentation does not mean they were somehow better than the best men Louis defended against. Im not seeing an argument here against Louis or "the system" outside of some feux affirmative action.

 

Cool then maybe if possible you can post some of this footage, assuming it hasn't gotten lost in some government conspiracy fiasco.

The champions of my argument were primarily Ray and Franklin, neither of who's ratings were greatly affected by the war..

I never accused Louis of personally ducking them.. Think I've made that clear. Only that some of those murderers row members were better than some of the guys he actually fought and that if there were a demand for such fights, they certainly could have been made if Louis's promoter jacobs wanted to..

We've covered this and it doesn't apply to anything I'm talking about.

See the above.

Thanks I'll do that.. Bye.

 

I know all this thanks.

There is no real beef. But if Louis wanted to sign to fight Elmer Ray instead of waiting for Ray and Walcott to have a rematch, he could have. There have been references to articles posted in this thread and others which pointed out that Ray was a legit threat despite your interpretation of his record. Franklin Lost to Pastor and fell off the face of the earth.. But after compiling a near 20 fight winning streak including scalps over previous Louis victims, if Jacobs wanted Joe to fight Franklin INSTEAD of Baer or Simon, he could have signed a deal.. I've covered this time and time again, and all you come back with is " he lost to Pastor" and oh yes " The War!!!"

I don't hold Louis to any standard. His legacy sits fine with me.. And I've acknowledged several times that those men were not his mandatories or in some cases not for very long.. My whole argument all along was that SOME of the murder's row men were better than SOME of the contenders Louis gave title shots to, and I should think that this is rather apparent given that they were beating plenty of them and fairly close in proximity to the time that Louis was also beating them... Furthermore, I argued that while Louis had no real obligation to face them, that those fights COULD have been made......

*** sits back and waits for further responses, which points to me accusing Louis of ducking black men, and references to the Nazi's invading Poland****

 

What year was he ranked no 3?

1942

In October 1941 Thompson drew with Simon, whom Louis had ko'd.
In1942 Thompson won and lost to Pat Valentino ,and lost to ko victim Bob Pastor.

He had 2 wins over Gus Dorazio, one by stoppage and one by split dec, he also drew with Tony Musto, Louis had ko'd Musto.


In1942 Louis was in the Army and defended his title twice for nothing to aid the War effort..

There is no strong case for Louis to defend against Thompson.
The onus is on you to prove :
1.They deserved a shot.
2.Louis avoided them.
3. He was in a position, timescale wise to give them a chance.

More than half the names on the list you posted were not deserving of title shots and one was actually retired before Louis even won the title!

A couple of them had their best runs when Louis was in the Army and not a free agent.

Nowhere have I said those names were not as good as some of the white challengers .,but closer inspection has proven that in most cases they weren't any better , and losing to White challengers such as Pastor,and Bettina hardly strengthened their case.

Bottom line Louis never failed to defend against his number one challenger

You are so transparent with your agenda that all you've achieved is to reinforce others opinion of you. Grand Wizard.:good

 

You mean like the conspiracy to keep Turkey Thompson, Elmer Ray, Jimmy Bivins, and Lem Franklin from every getting a title shot??

 

Haynes, Godoy, and Layne

Precisely, exactly what Thompson was and his record would look as good as Thompson's if he had fought in the weak era Thompson did. Instead he fought in the deepest era the HW division ever saw.

And he knocked Galento out brutally. So your argument is that Thompson was equally bad and thus deserved a shot more than people as limited or better than him? Sorry but that just doesnt add up.

 

Turkey Tompson and Elmer Ray are not so much fighters who got ducked, as fighters who were badly managed.

They could both have been steered towards title fights, but there was no coherent plan to do so.

 

I'm White which is rather inconvenient for your prejudiced against Whites premise, don't you think?atsch

 

Mendoza speak again?

Lets see the film you have viewed of Thompson to form your expert opinion of his style?

 

Ed Morbius voted NO to your original question.
Janitor hasn't cast a vote.

 

Lets look at it another way.

If you line up the fighters, that Louis potentially should have fought but didn't, isn't there a fairly even mix of black and white?

Melio Betina probably had an equal case to Elmer Ray.

Throw in Gunnar Barlund, Joey Maxim, and others, and what have you got?

A lot of fighters that lost out to somebody slightly better.