Why Joe Louis would've beaten Muhammad Ali.

Ali was all wrong for Louis.

 

So the writer is basically saying because Doug Jones managed to catch Clay with a few good left hooks, and Henry Cooper dropped him with a good left hook, plus Chuvalo caught him with one good right hand in a 15 round fight, Joe Louis beats him.

Other than that he spends most of the article talking about the post exile Ali who had neither the mobility or speed of the pre exile version.

 

It's a fascinating matchup because their styles contrast so strongly. Ali was highly unorthodox and Louis was one of the most textbook perfect fighters ever.
I usually favour Ali, but the article makes a good case for Louis.
Joe had combinations and precision that Ali never saw. Ali had a combination of size and speed that Louis never saw.

One thing I do know is that the skills on display would be outof the top drawer.

 

Nah, feet that move slowly are slow. Louis had slow feet and very limited mobility. The best boxers he faced were all light-heavyweights and relatively small cruiserweights. World of difference between those guys and a young Ali.

 

This.

 

Yep. And if his style was unorthodox, he understood boxing. Understood angles, understood distance, understood ring generalship. He just did things his own way.

 

Louis is my favourite heavy while Ali wouldn't get on my list of favourite fighters at all but I just can't see Louis, even with his vastly superior ****nal of puncher, getting to Ali
Ali would probable bust Louis up with his straight punches left right, left right.he seldom threw left or right hooks, body punches or uppercuts.
On paper he should be ordinary.........but he wasn't.
Over 15 I think Ali could do it in 11 or 12
Sorry Joe !!!!

 

Ali would utilize movement and ring generalship to win a decision.

 

I am going to say no.

While Louis was generally economical with his footwork, he could obviously move very well when he chose to. If he wanted to implement a fight plan that made extensive use of footwork, then he would do so.

I don’t see any evidence that he was particularly troubled by jabs either, because nobody had much success against him utilising this punch.

I think that he preferred not to get into wrestling matches, but that does not mean that he was not strong in the clinches. He was able to shove Primo Carnera round well enough.

Finally if you would describe his defence as merely “OK”, then you are probably missing something.

 

But his feet were as fast as they needed to be. When we watch prime Louis we don't see as guy hopelessly try to chase people down and having no luck due to his slow feet, he simply didn't fight like that. He had adequate reach. He boxed patiently behind a long jab, drew leads and countered. It's not a foot race, it's a boxing match.

yeah, and young Ali fought guys that can't be compared to young Louis.

 

Well said.

 

But he did fight one that could: Liston. The same can't be said of Louis.

(And please don't say that Liston had passed his prime in the seven months since he destroyed Patterson in one rd. There just isn't any good basis for such a claim.)

 

Were they where they needed to be against Joe Walcott (I)? Against Billy Conn? :think

 

What are you basing this one? (sincere question)

 

Liston didn't have Louis's timing, hand speed, or ability to counter. Those things were crucial in how Louis dealt with boxers.

What Liston and Louis had in common was power, jab and in some level the footwork.


I'd still pick Ali, though.