I have multiple times watched the available footage from Youtube and find that fight underwhelming ... styles ? Was Louis injured ? He just seems extremely cautious, methodical and not very impressive ... I understand that he came on strong(er) in the final third of fight but fill me in on whatI may be missing ...
According to Joe Louis' autobiography (My Life): Louis bruised his knuckles in the third round. Therefore, he couldn't use his right hand effectively. In the fifth round, Louis landed a big left hook on Farr which hurt him. He couldn't finish him though because his right hand wasn't sound anymore.... Dr. Vincent Nardiello and William Walker of the Athletic commission + Dr. Chester Ames (Louis' personal doctor) agreed that he suffered aggravated bone bruises in the right hand. Louis should put his right hand in a plaster cast for about one month (but only used it for 2 weeks). Besides, Louis was also dissatisfied with his performance and the preparation was a bit tricky because no one from Louis' team had seen Farr boxing before.
Off night? It happens. I can't think of one ATG that for whatever reason hasn't had at least one against a clearly inferior opponent. Most important point is, though the ATG wasn't at his best, he still found away to win.
Maybe Tommy Farr was a very good boxer in his own right? Maybe, since he was fighting for the heavyweight championship of the world, he was really well prepared? Maybe, because he was fighting to achieve a life long goal, he was trying as hard as he could to win? maybe because Tommy Farr was doing the absolute best that he could do, it took some effort and some time to defeat him?
You mean boxers aren’t automatons and piano keys? - I’ll have to cancel my orders of “Montreal” Durans immediately, the shipping from Panama is killing me.
!'ve always thought that Farr was just a tough man who knew how to fight. His performance was a grade above that of most of the fighters Louis defended his title against as well as his fights leading up to the title against Uzcudun, Carnera, Sharkey, and Max Baer. Off the top of my head, I can only identify Billy Conn, Max Schmeling, Joe Walcott, and Ezzard Charles as foes who gave better accounts of themselves in fights prior to Joe's first retirement. As far as the U.S. fights Tommy lost after the Louis affair, I suspect the home-cooked officials didn't give the Brit any breaks. That surely was the case with the Braddock-Farr fight, which was the only one of those bouts filmed. Based on the theatrical version (in which the editing probably favored Braddock), I thought Farr deserved the decision. And remember, we have clips of the first Farr-Baer fight in England, and those clips (admittedly edited by British filmakers) show Farr to excellent advantage. As I recall, Baer isn't even trying at the end of the fight. It seemed clear to me that he knew he had lost and was just going through the motions. I simply can't agree with the assessments of he grant and William Walker (in prior posts) that the fight is not a very entertaining fight to watch. Louis' performance may not have lived up to the lofty expectation that Joe should have kayoed Tommy, but the fight itself is one of my favorite of Louis' fights because the all-out effort of Tommy Farr. And it was more that just an effort. It was a grand performance.
In addition to other reasons cited, I think maybe he just needed a break. It was too soon after Braddock, and his next outing with Nathan Mann would be six months later. He also took time out after Schmeling II. Braddock and Schmeling II had to be emotionally draining on him, as critical as they were. Post war proved he couldn't be too inactive either however. He said the last time he really felt like himself was for Mauriello, the last title fight for which he had a quick turnover, following Conn II. Like Jack Sharkey, he needed to be active. (Inactivity really killed Sharkey's career.)
That's the way Louis fought and why I don't favor him in many mythical matchups. Let's face it, Farr is the type of fighter Mike Tyson used to KO in 20 seconds when he was on the way up.
Mike Tyson couldn't KO James Tillis in 20 seconds, let alone Tommy Farr. It's probable that Tyson kayos him in an actual fight but that doesn't mean Farr is a mediocre fighter.
Tyson was still a teenager and on the way up fighting an older more experienced fighter. Most did not last the distance and those that did held on for dear life or ran like Mitch Green did.
