Who´s your HW #1 KO/TKO-Artist?

You also mentioned "never been stopped before" and then listed "Berbick" and "Norton" ... so I thought you might be trying to credit Mercado and Garcia.

No, that's not a definitive list. There are some very durable men among them though, and I'm sure I'm missing several others.

 

It would be interesting to add up their combined number of fights going in against Louis, and the amount of stoppages defeats they had suffered at that point (and how many of those were real KOs and not just cuts).

 

I will use the criteria based on the questions in the OP.

There are 5 categories: quality/rank of opposition, durability of opponents, quickness of knockouts, sensationalism + one that I added punch selection.



Foreman:

ranked opponents: Foreman's ranked opponents were Roman, Frazier, Norton, Ali, Lyle I think? Lyle was coming off a tremendous KO over Shavers came into the fight for the vacant NABF belt which may have given the winner #1 contender status. In his second career, He had Rodrigues, Holyfield, and Moorer. So that's 8 ranked opponents with a record of 6-2 (6 KO's) against his highest ranked quality opponents. 75% KO rate. Overall I'd say he gets at least an B+ to an A-.

Durable opponents: Peralta, Chuvalo, Frazier, Ali, Young, Holyfield. (6 exceptionally durable opponents, 5-3, 4 KO's). 50%. To be fair, Peralta and especially Chuvalo are incredibly tough and hard to stop fighters and Foreman stopped both while relatively inexperienced. Foreman was the only person to make Frazier look that bad and he made it look easy. Twice in fact. Ali and Young were exceptionally slick and were great at surviving and Holyfield, well, everyone knows how tough he is and Foreman was old as hell. B- rating.

Quick KO's: Well the list would be quite long but it's noteworthy that Foreman bludgeoned his way to a title shot with a ridiculous 40-0 (37 KO) record which is a 92% KO ratio. Only 3 opponents lasted more than 5 rounds and only 2 (Peralta, Davila) went the distance (scheduled for 10 and 8 rounds). After his 1st retirement, his record was 45-2 (42 KO's) and only 3 went the distance including the very slippery and cagey Jimmu Young. I'd say that qualifies for an A+ rating as for as scoring early KO's.

Sensational stoppages: It's hard to top the devastating 1 sided blowouts of Frazier and Norton who were both superb hall of fame worthy fighters. He also had amazing come from behind knockouts over Lyle and Moorer. A rating. Foreman's knockouts weren't pretty, but when someone wasn't on his level he made sure the crowd knew it. A+ rating.

Punch selection: Every punch hurt. Even his glancing blows were knocking guys off balance. Foreman could bludgeon you with either hand without even putting much snap or weight behind a shot. But he wasn't just a simple brawler looking for one big shot, he could go to the body (arguable #1 in this category) and could throw combinations too. Contrary to popular belief, he had a powerful jab in his 1st career too. He was surprisingly accurate despite being so aggressive and physical. His main weaknesses were that he could sometimes be wide open for counters or straight shots down middle from quick handed fighters. The older and heavier he got, the harder it was for him to time and track down mobile opponents. A- overall.

Overall: I'd say overall Foreman gets a solid A since he does exceptionally well in 3 categories with A+ ratings, did ok in the ranked category with a B-, and came up short against durable/skilled opponents which shows his lack of finesse and skill when plan A (seek and destroy) doesn't work.



Dempsey:

ranked opponents: This is harder for me to accurately evaluate since the modern style ranking system/ring magazine/sanctioning bodies didn't exist back then. It doesn't help that Dempsey drew the color line and did not face noteworthy black boxers such as WIlls or Langford or even a Greb who was white. I'll let someone else with more historical knowledge judge this category.

Durable opponents: He did have Willard, Firpo, and Tunney, going 2-2. He was past it against Tunney and it was bad style matchup. Once again hard to guage how good he was with the lack of depth here. I'd say maybe a B rating.

Quick KO's: I believe Dempsey may still have the record for 1st round stoppages? If there was one thing he was good at, it was obliterating the competition as soon as the bell rung. He didn't have the neutral corner rule until late in his career, but this cannot be held against him. However, there were quite a few opponents who went the distance or later rounds with him and his KO% isn't particularly high. I'd give him a B+.

Sensational KO's: Considering the insane wight and height difference between himself and Willard, considering how he had to not only get off the floor but also get back into the ring against Firpo, considering how he often faced huge men such as Fulton and still chopped them down for the count, and was so famous for his brutality he earned one of the earliest examples of a million dollar gate in boxing and had a fighting fish named after him, it's hard to say anything negative about him in this category. There isn't much surviving footage, but what we do have and the historical records show Dempsey was like a cross between a leopard and a honey badge, just downright savage and jaw dropping displays of speed and power. Due to the lack of footage and quality of the era, I can't give him higher than an A- though. Feel free to change my mind.

Punch selection: Good counter puncher. Nasty hooks with either hand, decent right cross, good body puncher, but not much else. Lacks a consistent jab and uppercut. Fast but somewhat predictable and lacking in adaptability. Great at close and mid range but hopeless at long range against defensive fighters and slicksters. B+

Overall: I'd give him a B rating.



Frazier:

ranked opponents: Mathis, Ellis, Ali, Foreman, (3-4, 3 KO's). 43%. Ali and Foreman were both ranked and very hard men to stop. Especially Foreman given that it's a horrible stylistic nightmare for a short pressure guy like Frazier to face. He also faced both men while way past his prime in rematches. Considering all that, I'd give Frazier a C rating.

Durable opponents: Machen, Chuvalo, Zyglewicz, Bonavena, Quarry, Bugner (8-0, 5 KO's) 63%. Frazier actually faced quite a few tough and durable opponents so such a percentage is nothing to scoff at. Overall I'd give him a B+ rating for durable foes.

Quick KO's: Despite his reputation as a slow starter/grinder, only on 10 occasions in 37 bouts did Frazier's opponents make it past the 7th round. Of those opponents, 8 heard the final bell. This means out of all his 27 KO's, only 3 opponents were actually late round knockouts (Machen, Mathis, 2nd Ellis fight) and the rest were all stopped in 7 rounds or less. This cannot be overlooked in an era where bouts are scheduled for 15. Frazier deserves at least an A- rating, maybe even higher honestly. He's underrated here.

Sensational stoppages: The Ron Stander and Chuvalo bouts were gore fests as the bout with Quarry which won Frazier fight of the year. Terry Daniels didn't have a chance. He also had highlight reel KO's over Ellis and Foster and chopped Mathis down bit by bit, round by round in a clash of former Olympians. He didn't have many 1 punch KO's, but he really grinded and sliced you down without mercy and left a pool of blood wherever he went. Overall B+ rating.

Punch selection: An amazing hook that could be used in a whip like fashion to double or triple up on the opponent to the head or body. Or it could be thrown solidly with bad intentions. He could change angles mid swing and it could cause major swelling and cuts. One of the best tools in HW history. He had an underrated right hand but didn't use it often enough. GREAT body puncher and possibly the best in "phone booth" close range. Favors his left too much and lacks a jab. Can't fight backing up or on the outside. B+

Overall: I'd say B+. But as mentioned above, he could honestly get bumped up a notch considering he tore the whole division apart. What's holding Frazier back is his lack of 1 punch KO's/lack of down for the 10 count knockouts and an inability to adapt against bad matchups. He often had to grind opponents down or stop them on cuts.

 

Louis:

ranked opponents: I'm not sure the rankings at the time, but he did have the infamous 25 title defenses. 23 were by knockout. Not sure the rankings for this era, but that's exceptional either way. Braddock was the champion and Walcott I know hung around the rankings for years. I have to give him an A- rating based on sheer quantity but I need to get more data on this era to rank him any higher.

Durable opponents: Buddy Baer, Max Baer, Abe Simon, Galento, Godoy, Uzcudon, Pastor, Braddock, Marciano. 12 fights, 10 KO's, 1 decision, 1 loss. Spectacular record. It's especially noteworthy that Louis's rematches are often even more brutal than the 1st meeting. The only notch against him is that with the exception of Braddock and Walcott (who lacked durability) who were very cagey and skilled, he did not face many guys who could hold a candle to him in terms of the sweet science and modern skill. Many of these opponents lacked elite ring IQ. But he has quantity over quality and left no stone unturned in the division and these boxers were all tough as leather boots. A rating.

Quick KO's: Louis was a well oiled and refined punching machine. What he lacked in raw 1 punch power, he made up for in efficient combinations, hand speed, good balance and leverage, deadly accuracy, and an underrated killer instinct to brutalize an opponent he had hurt. However, even early on in his career, Louis went the distance multiple times failing to KO or even drop some opponents which showed that he lacked the raw destructive 1 punch equalizer to end things quickly. Wiater, Kranz, Berkie, Peroni, and Brown all went the 8 or 10 round distance and Louis only dropped 2 of them and this was early on in Louis career in his athletic prime. In his comeback his power began to fizzle out rapidly as he needed to settle for decision wins in the majority of these bouts. There were some noteable exceptions such as Schmeling, Buddy Baer, Roper, etc but these were by far the exception and not the norm. I'd have to give Louis a C+ for this category. He often need to land a barrage over several rounds to eventually knock you out. Common opponents of boxers such as Walcott and Marciano said Louis had faster hands but did not hit as hard as those two.

Sensaitonal KO's: Louis has plenty. He not only knocked guys out brutally, but spectacularly with nearly perfect form. As a rookie he took down ex champions such as Carnera, Max Baer, and Sharkey making them look like bums. He got his revenge on Schmeling in one of the most 1 sided ass whoopings in HW title fight history. He got careless against Galento, then proceeded to beat him sensless. He had the thrilling back and forth wars with Walcott with both men decking each other multiple times in both bouts. Louis and Buddy knocked each other out the ring in a rock em sock em robots brawl for the age, then he utterly crushed him in the rematch in 1 round to shut up the critics. He trailed on the cards against Conn, but managed to pin him down and close the show in a great come form behind KO. Just a phenomenal highlight reel blending top notch technique, sizzling hand speed, and calculating killer instinct. A+.

Punch selection: An expert with every punch in the book. Perhaps it was his great balance and form that contributed the most to his knockouts. Really there is nothing bad you can say aside from his slow feet and occasionally leaving himself open for counters. He corrected his low left hand weaknesss. A.

Overall: Louis has to get no less than an A. He lacks the brutal early round stoppages of other HW champions and raw 1 punch power, but this is the sweet science and I feel he does so exceptionally well in the other 3 categories it makes up for it.


Lewis:

ranked opponents: Rahman, Tua, Botha, Mavrovic, Briggs, Ruddock, Tucker, Akinwande Holyfield, Vitali (12 fights, 10-1-1 (5 KO's). He faced several high quality opponents. However, he ended up with a relatively unimpressive 42% KO ratio. Akinwande lost due to a DQ and was not KO'd or stopped. It should be noted Tucker and Holyfield were well past their prime too. If we were judging this category based based solely on performance/legacy in terms of beating ranked opponents he'd get at least a B+ or A- but the surprisingly low number of KO's means I have to give him a C+.

Durable opponents: Mercer, McCall, Tua, Mavrovic, Tucker, Holyfield, Vitali. 9 fights but only 1 KO. Lewis had plenty of opportunities to prove he could stop a durable opponent and he consistently failed to do so with the exception of Vitali due to freakish cut (Vitali never hit the canvas). He gets a D+. This jarring statistic shows just how cautious Lewis was and that he was more of a boxer/puncher outside fighter, not a KO artist or slugger in spite of the fact he obviously hit very hard with his massive frame and great form. He made zero efforts at all to stop Tua for instance, content to cruise to a decision win. That's just how he was: a professional first.

Quick KO's: Lennox has a few noteworthy early KO's. Namingly Golota, Ruddock, Briggs, Grant, Botha, Rahman all within 5 rounds or less believe. This was the exception, not the rule and Lewis very rarely came out steaming looking for blood early. But the few early KO's he does have are pretty impressive. I'll give him a B+.

Sensational KO's: Lewis actually has a few shocking blowouts in spite of his normally cautious style. The Golota wipeout is extremely notable since the common thought at the time was that Golota was top 4 in the division due to his bouts with Bowe. The Ruddock KO was a clean and smooth KO over a guy ranked #1 in a bout that was considered an even matchup. Briggs was the lineal champion and a prime rugged slugger and Lewis picked him apart fairly early and easily aside from a flash knockdown. He also decimated guys like Morrison, Grant, and of course the sweet revenge against Rahman. Gotta give him an A.

Punch selection: A great heavy jab with some thump to it, but he tended to paw with it and didn't always commit to the punch. Crunching right crosses and uppercuts that would rattle anyone's brain if they landed flush. However, he was a mediocre combination puncher except in short spurts, rarely throwing more than 2-3 punches (perhaps fearing gassing out with his huge size). Didn't go to the body enough and is pretty bad on the inside, relying on his clinching and strength to avoid this range. B.

Overall: Man it's hard to rank Lewis since he did so great as far as the eye test/sensational KO's yet did so poorly in the other 2 categories. I think a solid B is more than fair. It's not like he was knocking over tomato cans, some of his stoppages were over very big modern sized guys who were ALSO ranked at the time so you can't just dismiss that. Lewis' punching power is easy to judge, but the effectiveness of that power is much harder to figure out.

 

Tyson:

ranked opponents: Green, Ribalta, Thomas, Berbick, Biggs, Bruno, Williams, Spinks, Smith, Douglas, Ruddock, Botha, Holyfield, Lewis. 16 fights (10 KO's, 4 losses, 63% KO ratio). One of Tyson's most impressive categories is that he tore through the division wiping out both cans and contenders. He has one of the best records not just at heavyweight, but in general in terms of stopping ranked opposition. The elephant in the room is that the 3 best fighters he faced, he lost to in devastating fashion (Douglas, Holyfield, Lewis). In other words, he was devastating and consistent when taking out mid level fighters, but struggled heavily with the elites. The counter to this is that Tyson was past his prime for 2 of those bouts, but then you could flip it around and say both Lewis and Holyfield were older than Tyson and Holyfield had been in even more bouts and had a longer more rugged career than Tyson. I try to be objective and I've heard many good arguments excusing these losses, but I can't get past the glaring 0-4 record in the biggest fights of his career. B+ for consistency and devastating KO's over opponents who supposed to be good challengers.

Durable opponents: Green, Berbick, Thomas, Smith, Holmes. 5 fights, 3 KO's. Green was nothing special but had a good chin and knew how to survive. Thomas was a skilled former champ with a great jab and very durable. Smith was a paper champ but mainly fought to survive to be fair to Tyson, but exposed his inability to deal with maul and clinch tactics against bigger men. Holmes had never been KO'd before or since and while definitely past his prime, went on to have a decent mini comeback for a few years in the 90's. Not bad, but could have been better. There were some durable opponents in his era he could have fought but just never did for one reason or another. A solid B primarily because of Holmes.

Quick KO's: Everyone is familiar with his crazy record of early round blowouts. No need to elaborate. A+

Sensational KO's: Again, no need to really dig deep. As mentioned above, he went on a rampage knocking out contenders ranked in the top 10 and did so in completely 1 sided bouts. His vicious 1st round stoppage over Spinks was more like a public execution than a fight. His last minute KO of Ribalta will be remembered for decades. A combination punching machine that hadn't been seen since the days of Louis. There's a reason he was the youngest champ and a household name. A+

Punch selection: What Tyson was good at he was arguably the best at, but the areas where he was lacking where like huge potholes. His hook, while not as versatile or snappy as Frazier's, was one of the strongest the division had ever seen and was thrown with perfect speed and timing. He also had a hell of an overhand right, a demoralizing right uppercut, and was just an amazing body puncher. He actually had a great jab too, but slowly started to abandon it in spite of his short reach. While he was good at targeting the body, he wasn't that great on the inside and could be tied up surprisingly easily. He also struggled to get close and land on tall strong guys with long arms and power. He couldn't fight backing up, but he was a good counter puncher who used the best head movement of all time to nail guys who got too aggressive. A-.

Overall: He doesnt't have anything less than a B in any category. Tyson was truly something special and his power was both frightening and effective. A solid A in his prime, but slowly fizzled out as he got older and became more of a simple head hunter.




Marciano:

ranked opponents: I believe Mathews was ranked. A newspaper article from the Ottawa citizen states that it was a 10 round elimination bout for Walcott's title. I believe Layne, Lastarza, and Louis were ranked. Cokkel was ranked #2.Then of course there's Walcott, Charles, and Moore. 11 fights, 9 KO's. As had been discussed far too often and should be common knowledge by now, Marciano's best opponents were often heavily shopworn and past their prime I believe the median age for his 4 best was 36 each having been in more than 60 bouts. However, Layne and Lastarza were prime undefeated young guys and Mathews was also pretty young and on a win streak and ranked. It was a weak era but he did what he was supposed to do and took care of business. Like Louis, he did even better in rematches. A- rating.

Durable opponents: Ted Lowrey, Lastarza, Charles, Vingo. 7 fights, 3 KO's. Nothing noteworthy here.Charles was moving up from light heavy and way past his prime. He fouled Lastarza several times throughout the bout. Other than being the only guy to stop the rookie Vingo whom he beat into retirement, Marciano doesn't excel in this category but he always left a big impression on people when he shared the ring with them even if he didn't stop them. C+.

Quick KO's: Marciano was very rugged and sloppy, often needing multiple rounds to take out even mediocre opponents. He was rather inconsistent switching between 1 hitter quitters and late round stoppages. He did have a few exceptions such as the return bout with Walcott, Mathews, and Layne which were all fairly early and within 6 rounds. But this wasn't his strong suit. His stamina and ability to apply relentless pressure were how he scored KO's, not flashy hand speed or finishing ability. C-.

Sensational KO's: Say what you want about his technique and awkwardness, but Rocky had tons of heart and there was never a dull moment. Even in the rare exception he couldn't stop someone or struggled to do such as the Cokkel bout, he gave the fans their moneys worth throwing power punch after power punch without slowing down until the ref stopped it. The Walcott bout remains one of the most dramatic comeback stories in boxing history. His ring out KO over Louis was a sad and brutal display of the passing of the torch between the old and new. He rallied in the Charles rematch with blood gushing spooked that he himself may get stopped. Rocky made up for his lack of finesse with his savagery, killer instinct, and superb conditioning. A solid A.

The devastating short right hand suzie Q, the unpredictable leaping gazelle punch. These were his main tools, but he was honestly a threat with either hand. He was good to great with most punches aside from a textbook jab which is why he often struggled to get inside against skilled textbook fighters. Where he really shined was his overwhelming combinations throwing a barrage from odd angles that became too much to defend against after becoming exhausted struggling to keep him off of you. Overall B+

Overall: I would say B+ overall but he's honestly a little underrated and you can bump him up to A- considering his impressive KO% and clearing out his division undefeated.

 

Liston:

Ranked opponents: Clark, Harris, Machen, Williams, Folley, Patterson, Ali, Martin. 11 fights, 7 KO's, 3 losses. 64% KO ratio against ranked fighters. It should be noted that Liston had been the number 1 contender for more than a year and was avoided by Patterson and Ingemar Johanson and he spent a long time clearing out the division in the mean time. He was past his prime against Ali and a washed up alcoholic old fighter against Martin. Overall I'd give him a B+ since the bouts he won in such devastating fashion over most of the best opponents available.

Durable opponents: Bethea had never been floored, let alone KO'd, and Liston not only knocked out 7 teeth but demolished him in 1 round. Clark and Marshall were also pretty tough guys and not easy stop. Williams was a prime 25 year old with 45 wins, 37 KO's, and had only been stopped once previously. Scrap Iron Johnson was a very durable man and Liston floored him in the 1st and proceeded to stop him in the 7th. Then there's Martin who although Liston lost this bout, he did manage to drop him and battered him so badly he suffered a detached retina and had to retire prematurely. He lacks quantity, but the few durable fighters he faced were battered and broken when he was done with them. I'd say a C+ rating.

Quick KO's: Daniels, Harris, Bethea, Patterson, Folley, Williams, Valdez, all good skilled boxers who were viciously KO'd in just a few rounds. Liston was a monster, a shark who smelled blood in the water and sank his fangs as soon as he knew a guy was hurt. Of his 39 KO's, 38 were within 7 rounds or less (7 in the 1st round). His title winning bout with Patterson is the quickest and most shockingly 1 sided KO's over a lineal reigning champ. A staggering statistic indicating very heavy hands a superb finishing ability. A+

Sensational KO's: Just type in Liston knockouts on youtube. The eye test speaks for itself. He had the boxer puncher skills and patience of Louis, the ferocity and glare of Tyson, clubbing power similar to Foreman, the toughness of Marciano, plus he had stamina to go the distance. Despite being an old man, he bludgeoned poor Wepner's face into tomato paste. He fought through a broken nose to batter the hard hitting Williams into submission. His uppercuts that floored Patterson looked like they could have stunned a gorilla. He combined all these attributes to level his opposition like a wrecking ball and looked completely merciless and detached while doing so. A+

Punch selection/techinque: Liston had it all. Power in both hands. A ramrod jab that could control the distance as well as hammer a guy's face in, a sledgehammer left hook, powerful and underrated right cross, and a heavy uppercut that snapped heads back. Liston was a threat no matter what he hit you with. The only thing he lacked was hand speed and snap. A

Overall: A. Liston was just a punching machine and a h2h monster who passes both the eye test and had a decent record over ranked opponents.



Wladmir:

ranked opponents: Byrd, Brewster, Austin, Rahman, Chambers, Povetkin, Haye, Leapai, Pulev, Fury, Joshua. 13 fights, (7 KO's, 3 losses, 54% KO ratio). Wladmir had a very long and noteworthy career and beat many highly ranked opponents. Unfortunately, his best competition was either coming up in weight and signficantly smaller (Byrd, Haye) or came at the end of Klitschko's career when he was far past his prime (Joshua, Fury). This makes his record a litle bit difficult to evaluate since he completely dominated the former, and the bouts with the latter 2 young champions could have gone either way honestly. Povetkin wasn't exactly a big guy either, honestly he was a flabby cruiserweight who was pumped full of PEDs. Being unable to KO Byrd the first time, and failing to stop Haye are marks against him (tho to be fair Byrd is a very slipper boxer and Haye ran for the hills). Rahman was old as hell and many of Wladmir's opponents were in their 30's. He lacks that key signature win or thrilling war but gets points for longevity and consistency. B+

Durable opponents: Monroe, Puritty, Vujicic, Schulz, Brewster, Brock, Povetkin, Wach, Chambers, Pulev, Jennings. Wladmir fought many durable guys. It's noewrothy he's the only one to stop guys like Brock, Chambers, and Pulev. He couldn't put a dent in Wach or Povetkin for some reason, and he gassed out attempting to stop Puritty. Brewster showed him no respect and walked through his punches. The rematch doesn't mean much since he was inactive and had major eye issues. But once again, he gets points for consistency taking out many durable big modern sized guys in devastating fashio. B+.

Quick KO's: In spite of his cautious outside style, Wlad had 43 of his 53 KO's fairly early within the first 7 rounds ((81%), 11 1st round KO's. He didn't fight in the greatest era, but this is impressive no matter how you slice it. If only the names matched the record. A-.

Sensational KO's: With a few exceptions such as the revenge against Peter, clipping Byrd's wings, or taking out Pulev, Wladmir sorely lacked in the excitement department (unless you literally only watch the final KO punch landing in highlights). His blows are still very painful to watch when they do land flush. While working under Emmanuel Steward, he became much more conservative and used his infamous jab and grab style and the highlight stoppages from his younger days became a thing of the past. He became a much more complete boxer but far less exciting. But hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it. C+

Punch selection: One of the best jabs in history, he was one of the best at range control and taking fulll advantage of his reach. It wasn't as mean and thudding as Liston's or as snappy as Holmes' jabs, but it had a good combination of power, speed, and technique to rule the division for nearly a decade. He also had a dreaded right hand that became even scarier when combined with his jab for a powerful 1-2. He also had a cracking left hook. What he sorely lacked were heavy uppercuts, body shots, and combination punching. The fact he lasted as long as he did in spite of his lack of versatility is amazing. A-.

Overall: It's hard to say since he's so good in some areas, but mediocre or flat out bad in others. He lacks exciting signature wins and recognizable names, but the rankings don't lie. He wasn't simply defending his belt against bums just because they weren't as well known. He did himself a disservice by not letting his hands go more however. Overall I'd have to give him a B+ or A- give or take.


So far, Louis, Liston, Foreman, Tyson have the best scores. I didn't give anyone an overall A+ for very good reason (although you could argue Louis deserves an A+ depending on how you view the "rankings" category), but it would likely boil down to one of these 4 imho.

 

Joe Louis has the longest list of stoppage of durable fighters in HW history. Not only that, but he was by far the most consistent with knocking out them. If you want to criticize Louis, then better choose different criteria because Louis eats the rest alive in this aspect

 

Do you have a top 5 of durable fellows Louis stopped ?
And for Tyson and Foreman ?

 

The first time Baer was stopped (only stopped 3 times in 79 fights)
The second time Godoy was stopped (first being when he was a teenager, and only stopped 3 times in 127 fights)
The first time Mauriello was stopped, and by first round KO (only stopped 4 times in 96 fights)
The first time Bob Pastor was stopped (only stopped twice in 65 fights)
The only time Braddock was KOed in 78 fights, despite entering fights injured
The only time Uzcudun was stopped in 69 fights
In 112 bouts every other time Galento was stopped it was either an injury or a cut
The only time John Henry Lewis was koed in 116 bouts

And also
The only person to KO Billy Conn in 76 bouts, which he did twice
Stopped Lee Ramage twice when he'd only been stopped once before in 53 fights

11 (or 12) first round KOs, 6 of which were against people who'd been top 10 in The Ring end of year rankings.

 

THIS. ALL DAY THIS.

 

Maher, Sheppard, Wilder, Cleveland, Mac Foster?

 

Joe Louis, a class act, great fighter, a good example for the people, young and old.