Who was more dominant in their reign ?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Dance84, Jun 1, 2021.

who was more dominant

  1. Wladimir Klitschko

    17.9%
  2. Joe Louis

    82.1%
  1. Colonel Sanders

    Colonel Sanders Pounchin powar calculateur Full Member

    7,003
    3,257
    Sep 13, 2012
    Tony Thompson beats the brakes off a lot of Louis opponents, undersized ones particularly.
     
    NoNeck likes this.
  2. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    15,772
    8,112
    Apr 3, 2012
    Which opponent would’ve butchered Thompson? Who ever butchered Thompson?
     
    Colonel Sanders likes this.
  3. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    23,653
    35,769
    Mar 3, 2019
    Schmeling would've battered him. Max Baer, Buddy, as well. Walcott would've won every round. Conn would've too. Hell, Marciano sends him to the morgue.

    There's about ten others who were better and would likely win. Would be more competitive though.
     
    70sFan865 likes this.
  4. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    15,772
    8,112
    Apr 3, 2012
    Funnily enough, none of these things actually happened.
     
  5. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    23,653
    35,769
    Mar 3, 2019
    Given that nobody has invented a time machine yet, it's no wonder.
     
    scandcb, BitPlayerVesti and 70sFan865 like this.
  6. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    15,772
    8,112
    Apr 3, 2012
    Thankfully, we do know that Thompson never lost to any sub 6’0 cruiserweight sand light heavies.
     
    Colonel Sanders likes this.
  7. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    23,653
    35,769
    Mar 3, 2019
    And we know he wasn't quite good enough to beat Carlos Takam, and that he never fought anyone as good as Billy Conn.
     
    Richard M Murrieta and 70sFan865 like this.
  8. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    15,772
    8,112
    Apr 3, 2012
    He was 40+ when he lost to Takam. The reason he was still around was that he was brought in to lose to guys like Price and Solis, but he ended them as serious players.
     
    Colonel Sanders likes this.
  9. Colonel Sanders

    Colonel Sanders Pounchin powar calculateur Full Member

    7,003
    3,257
    Sep 13, 2012
    That Tony was almost 43.
     
  10. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,668
    6,933
    May 30, 2019
    :D :D :D

    He might crack Louis top 20 if we'd be generous for him.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  11. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    23,653
    35,769
    Mar 3, 2019
    He was nearly 40 for the Wlad rematch...

    I don't think you realise how you've just undermined your own argument there. He was brought in because he was perceived as past his best vs fighters he should've lost to - and he beat them, proving he wasn't. And neither Price, nor Solis were ever serious players.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  12. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    15,772
    8,112
    Apr 3, 2012
    He was winning fights and was mandated for the rematch. They thought he was washed up after that, but he messed up some careers.
     
  13. dinovelvet

    dinovelvet Antifanboi Full Member

    52,632
    11,584
    Jul 21, 2012
    He was 41 actually and got the rematch by default when Chambers pulled out of a final eliminator. . Poor fight but there was nobody else to chose back then. Guys he beat years prior were still in contention The division was a complete wasteland
     
  14. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Hagiographer Full Member

    7,532
    9,087
    Oct 28, 2017
    Did he fight a single fighter that size that was any good?
     
    George Crowcroft and 70sFan865 like this.