About Galento -- I saw his fight with Joe Louis, and mister Galento was not technically refined. I'd go as far as saying that he brings far less to the table than Foreman. Basically all he had going for him was lunging in with big, hard shots -- and Louis, in my opinion, didn't do any of the things you guys suggested. I did not see a man calmly firing counters off the back foot. I saw a man backing up, getting caught, and getting roughed up near the ropes. I'm of the opinion that George would shove and advance and make Louis fight going back in a way he wasn't comfortable doing, George would come in with big shots, and catch him. I see this as a realistic possibility. In my mind, if Louis could stand inside of Foreman, in his preferred range, his shorter, more accurate shots in combination could make quick work of Foreman despite his chin -- I've seen Foreman react when hurt and I've seen Joe Louis finish. This fight would be over within three rounds. Either way. But my money's on George.
Gallento is a bad analogy. He was a verry short heavyweight who fought out of a crouch which is a style that always troubled Louis (see Godoy I). He also did some work on the inside. Foreman is more of a stand up long range slugger in the mould of Max Baer. The kind of fighter Louis feasted on and did exactly what we have described against.
'Crouching style'? I'll be honest and say I don't think much of Tony Galento at all. He's fat, short, fights almost on his ankles to then suddenly leap forward (a technique soon incorporated into gyms everywhere) and has no standout abilities except for the power of his punch. He's just a streetfighter. Considering how much flak fighters like Sam Peter and James Toney get for entering the ring out of shape, it's surprising Galento gets any respect at all. I have to be honest, I had a much higher opinion of Louis before seeing this fight. Nowadays I believe he was a born fighter who didn't have the personality to match his talents. He seemed childlike in some ways. Anyway, that was a bit rambling, I personally don't see Louis not folding under the kind of pressure George brings if Galento gave ghim trouble. It's not the crouching style -- it's Louis on the ropes, he seems uncomfortable, he seems to want some time to pick his shots. Once Foreman has him in reverse, he'll have authority.
I agree with your analysis of Galento being an out of shape street fighter as opposed to being a true world class contender. I disagree, however that Louis's poor performance against Galento should be used as a measure when comparing him to Foreman. I would rather use the Max Baer and Buddy Baer fights to draw my conclusions than just one lackluster performance against a pretender. Max and Buddy were not exactly in the same class as Foreman in my opinion, but they bore far more similarities to George than Galento did. Both Guys were well over 6 feet tall, and Buddy was on average, 245 Lbs at 6'61/2. Both guys hit like trucks, and from what I understand used similar tactics ( again I feel George was better ). Nevertheless, Louis typically destroyed these types of fighters. The problem with fighters like George, Buddy and Max, is that they left themselves open, and were often made to pay for their offensive mistakes. This is not to say that Louis would beat Foreman, nor that I would even pick him, but I'd prefer to make my preditions based on Louis's performance against the Baer bros. Rather than Galento or anyone else.
You might be right. The last fight I've seen of Louis is the one against Galento. I'll go and re-watch the fights against Max and Buddy to refresh my memory of what a good Louis could do to bigger men. I'm actually not sure I've ever seen his match with Buddy Baer.
Neither fighter exhibited anything close to special in terms of defensive prowess in their primes, let's be honest; both are susceptible of getting hit from time to time. However, Only one of these men established a reputation of being an inaccurate slob in the ring: Big George. It's laughable to me how some here claim that he was somehow efficient with his punching technique when he hopelessly was not. It's true, sooner or later Louis may be liable to get caught with a lucky bomb, but it is my opinion that if he should find his feet, he would face minimum follow-through from George. Here, I thought it best to illustrate the scenario with the use of youtube: George Foreman vs Luis Faustino Pires 1971 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xx9fZrt7tA See? Oh man, I crack up everytime I see this. Pay close attention at around 1:14 for pure comedy
I've never seen either of his two fights with Buddy Baer either, although Buddy From what I understand, was similar to both Max and Foreman. I'll check youtube to see if these fights are available. Apparently, Buddy Floored Louis in the first match, but fell victom to Joe in only one round in the second fight.
In the event that George does floor Joe Louis, I believe it would be very temporary (provided it is just the one shot that I am imagining and not a sustained beatdown, which I cannot see George dish out anyway). When he gets up it'll be the same old story, operating inside those wild, clubbing blows, disrupting the momentum before they hit their mark. Now, George might have the chin to survive this (I personally don't believe so), but after maybe the 9th or the 10th it won't matter.
If you want to see Louis look bad watch him against a fighter who uses a low crouch and aplies inside pressure like Godoy or Gallento. Wan't another fighter who is not an all time great who would make him look bad? George Chuvalo. If you want to see Louis look unbeatable then watch him against a big hitter who trades with him at range like Max Baer, Lou Nova or Buddy Baer.
Well, despite the knockdown, I believe I've made a complete ass of myself with the comment pertaining to Louis folding under pressure. I did not expect him to be this calm and collected while being walked down. How was Louis at taking damage? Not the chin, but say, clubbing shots to the arms and body? I can't recall a time when he had to endure that. If there's no example, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say his ability to endure a war was fitting of the champion he was, but it'd be nice to have some footage.
I just started a thread entitled B. Baer compared to G Foreman. I posted youtube links with footage of both. If you get time check it out, and maybe we'll even get a discussion going :good
I don't give a **** if he knocked out 100 light heavyweights. It's funny, my original post mentioned that "he may have hit hard at light heavy" and I was curious to which Einstein would say something like you have above.
Braddock could hit. He was a wrecking machine at light heavy and even at heavyweight he scored a good few knockouts in the first two rounds despite chronic hand problems.