To agree on who had more skill, we must first agree on what we are defining as skill. If we think Louis has more ability, then surely Wlad gets brownie points for making the most of his abilities, which is a skill in itself. The same as someone being smart, or intelligent. I'd put intelligence down to someone's capacity to learn and being smart is what you do with it. I'd still take Louis as the more skilled operator though, he might not look so skilled if he fought in Wlad's era though.
Louis was more skillful. He could operate at diferent ranges and still be dangerous. Louis put his punches together in combination much better. He didn't have to grab and hold everytime his opponent got within shouting distance.
why r we comparing a jab and grab tchamp who got toasted easily by middlers everytime, to the ATG number 1? dont get it.
So it seems unanimous people think louis was more skilled than Wladmir. We've already established size alone isn't enough to beat louis. So why do people think Wladmir would "easily" beat Joe Louis? The math isn't adding up.
I said about even. Louis I feel was a bit ahead of his time. His combination punching is top class and his footwork is planted and balanced. Wlad on the other hand is more mobile and systematic. He has imo less finishing ability but much more ability to really control and smother a fight. Louis is looking to crack open a defence and pour an artillery barrage in. Wlad is looking to control the other guy's offence and to slowly batter him to bits to the point where he's ripe for the taking. Younger Wlad seemed much more Louis-like than Steward Wlad, tbh. Both are great.
Because Wlad's style is dedicated to imposing his size on a smaller man. Louis had huge firepower in part because he kept his feet planted when firing. Wlad sacrifices his firepower in favour of mobility, to deny the big hitters a chance to get set. Wlad won't play Louis' game but Louis has to play Wlad's game. They both worked off the jab but Wlad is 81' to Louis' 76 inches. I very much think that Wlad would deny Louis the ability to get set and, because he plays the distance game so well, probably win the battle of the jabs and reset him often. Close in Wlad does his usual thing of hugging Louis' offence to death and leaning on his back. Louis is up **** creek without a paddle if he gets a ref that allows Wlad to hug him. Joe would need to both get a ref that brooks no holding nonsense and also abandon his usual gameplan before I'd give him a decent chance.
You make some good points but your argument hinges on wladmir's so called mobility and imposing his size. Wlad wasn't flat footed or a plodder, but he wasnt exactly an elegant slickster either. Louis was able to beat two very good movers in conn and Walcott. And you yourself admitted that the type of ref and what he allows can drastically change the outcome. So lets look at the stats: -size and power alone isnt enough. Louis has beaten both men who had size and strength similar to wladmir (although they obviously werent as good as him). Reach and height were never a problen for joe. -the consensus is that louis had more skill than Wladmir (although you make the case theyre even in some ways) -joe was one of the deadliest combination punchers in the history of the sport, and a great finisher. If he had you hurt, you were done. Wladmir might have had a little more raw power, but he wasnt the greatest finisher and his combinations were fairly basic. Wladmir also tended to be gunshy and wasnt too proud to cruise to a decision win, which might actually work against him as it could give joe more opportunities (he had many late round kos). -joe never had stamina problems even as a rookie and had elite cardio for all 15 rounds. Wladmir had to learn to pace himself under Emmanuel stewart because his large frame and muscles led to him gassing out against Brewster, a guy who wouldnt back off and brought the fight to him. -Louis beat many slick movers who had even better mobility than the tall heavy Wladmir -wladmir had a weak chin and has been kod early before. -wladmirs defense wasnt that good and he relied on a clinching strategy when in danger. Again, you are the one pointing out that a different ref might severely change the outcome. One could flip it around and point out louis lacked defense and didnt take hits all too well either, but that isn't the point. The point is with a neutral ref who penalizes excessive holding, it seems bizarre that one would claim wladmir "easily" wins given all the facts ive listed. In a best of 3 series, I dont see how louis couldnt pull off at least 1 win (especially given that he always does better in rematches). Outsids of wladmir blasting louis out early or having a very lenient ref, this seems like a bad matchup on paper. You cant have a weak chin, mediocre defense, and stamina issues and expect to "easily" beat joe louis.
Average chin, excellent defence, excellent jab, huge power. It just seems a bad matchup for me for Louis. I guess we see different things here. I agree Louis had better cardio and is a better (much better, let's be honest) finisher - but he needs to find a way to translate that into pressure against a guy whose whole style is built around avoiding engagement with blazing combination punchers. Louis was effective in part because he had a systematic modern approach but he's trying to impose that on a guy who has a style literally built to beat his. At least, that's how I see it. Now, a young Wlad vs Louis would be a different fight and probably a fight for the ages, because that Wlad was keen to exchange and had a similar approach to Louis.
You say his style was built to beat guys joe louis' size but his record doesnt show that. He lost to 6'2 brewster and struggled with 6'2 peter in their 1st fight, neither of them could hold a candle to joe in terms of skill. 6'2 Povetkin was able to go the distance despite all the illegal holding and back humping. He couldnt ko a gunshy 6'3 David haye either and lost a point for excessive holding in that fight as well. Had he easily stopped all these guys then your argument would make a little more sense. I do agree that wladmir's style was designed to take advantage of his height and reach but when you compare his opponents who were closest to joe in terms of height and power, his record is pretty "meh".
Did they fight like Joe Louis? How did Wlad approach those fights? How did Wlad adjust after the Brewster loss? Does Povetkin fight like Joe Louis? Does Haye fight like Joe Louis? He did, however, beat all the guys that you mentioned. Some pretty easily. Am I saying they're better than Louis? No. I'm saying that Louis' style is less favourable to beat Klitschko than some of theirs were. Especially Peter, who, despite his crudeness, was explosive and was absolutely not scared to charge in headfirst and let bombs fly.
