What Did Joe Louis Do Better Than Mike Tyson

Louis never fought Moore. It speaks volumes that you think he did.

 

I know that but I just wanted to illustrate the skill level because Moore on a pure skill was above all the ones I mentioned and he would be absolute cannon fodder vs Tyson , skill dis and dat.

 

keeping his life on the rails during his career

sometimes gets ranked above Ali

pound for pound he punched harder than Tyson and had cleaner on target knockouts

Tyson looked up to him, not the other way around

 

"There is not one of Louis's opponents etc, etc", same sentence "that leaves us with Moore".

 

This is the same idiot who was wondering which “Einsteins voted for Frazier”…. In a public poll. I wouldn’t take anything he says to seriously.

 

Out of curiosity, who did Tyson beat who was as big as Primo Carnera, or Buddy Baer?

I mean excluding men who were not relevant contenders at the time.

Tyson never came from behind to beat anybody.

Every time he was behind, he simply lost.

True, but Louis never lost to a man who did not win the lineal title in a different fight.

No, because he didn't hold the tittle for long enough, for people to start calling ranked contenders bums.

I am not making any comment on who would win head to head, but when it comes to resume, Louis has it sewn up!

 

Tyson has better head movement, more creative body shots, better uppercuts, and smoother defense. He was also better at cutting the ring off and slowing down movers and technicians. I would say he had slightly more raw power and durability as well, although neither of those are "skills".

 

I would say Louis has quantity while Tyson has quality when it comes to resume. Louis dominated for an incredibly long time and beat several contenders regardless of what anyone thinks of those contenders. Tyson's era wasn't exactly glamorous either since the two best men he beat in his prime were an old inactive Holmes, terrified Spinx moving up in weight, but he does have a lot of good upper/mid level opponents such as prime Berbick, Ruddock, Williams, Bruno, etc.

The best fighters Louis beat he went life and death with them (Schmeling, Walcott, Charles, Rocky) officially going 3-3 against them with one of those wins being highly controversial. But to be fair, Louis was past his prime against Charles and Rocky. If we're going to go easy on Louis for that, we can't scald Tyson too hard for the losses to Holyfield and Lewis (easily the two best opponents of his career). The loss to Schmeling isn't as bad as the loss to Douglas, but given their trajectory and ability, they're on par so it cancels out.

Tyson benefited from more belts which helps spice up his resume, and he cleared the division out but so did Louis in his 1 belt era (for a damn long time). Tyson fizzled out early and didn't live up to his potential while there really wasn't anything more Louis could've done except maybe beat a few more black boxers that weren't getting many opportunities. However, those would've just been small cherries on top. Louis did manage to avenge at least 1 defeat, Tyson none. Overall Louis does have some edges over Tyson in resume without getting into subjective h2h discussions in regards to their opponents.

 

Joe Louis was good at everything, especially being able to adapt to any style. Louis was kind of like the jack of all trades master of all. Tyson was the Master of 1 specific substyle the Peek A Boo. Its hard to knock either style considering both styles were highly successful.

 

Consistency, longevity. Joe Louis had a lot on his plate during his boxing career, he served our country bravely in a time of need in World War II, he also gave up time to his family resulting in divorce proceedings, he handled it with maturity as divorce is never pleasant. Louis trained very hard, never took any opponent for granted as Mike Tyson would later do against James Buster Douglas on Feb 11 1990, Louis unlike Tyson pretty much stayed with the same management. Both were hard hitting champions respectively.

 

Did Tyson really have a better/more effective defense than Louis? Louis's defensive fundamentals appear to me much better and are what you'd learn/be taught. Tyson's head movement looks more aesthetic maybe, flashier etc.

 

Tysons defense was brilliant when he was having it his own way but it opened up quite a bit if one was good enough to go with him at times. It would be as good or better against most of the guys Louis fought but put them in against ATG's and there may not be too much between them.

 

Louis listened to and strictly followed his trainers advice and guidance.

As such, he was able to continually develop and correct errors in his game and/or strategy as and when necessary/required.

This ethic was reflected during his career performances in general and especially exemplified in his performances in rematches.

Joe dealt with a major defeat but came back, bigger and better, not leaving us to heavily speculate as to what might’ve been in the event of his prime bubble remaining burst.

 

Tyson's head movement wasn't really defensive as much as it was to hopefully avoid shots as he's coming in, any 8/10+ jabber or someone with precision timing like Holyfield exposed it, Rooney never switched up the shots or made an element of the exercise unpredictable which conditioned Tyson to do it with a default/unadaptable rhythm, he was fast so it worked a lot but wasn't actually that sound of a defensive technique

 

Honestly everything. Tyson was flashier- but it let him down his style was flawed, only Louis’s mind would him down.