Why nobody could have matched Joe Louis's record

Boilermaker · Nov 29, 2010

janitor said: ↑

A few observations:

Ali had problems with Doug Jones and Henry Cooper early in his career, and fighting to Louis's schedule he would be thrown in against better fighters sooner.

Also, later in his career when he is slowing down he is not going to have Louis's power to bail him out against people like Walcott.

Click to expand...

Fair point, but you would have to give Ali the best shot at doing it, wouldnt you.

I don't think that McCall or Ramhan were exceptional punchers. There were certainly people like them in Louis's era, and we are going to be matching Lewis against more of them, more often, and sooner.

Is Lewis really going to be ready for Max Baer 14 months after his professional debut for example?

Click to expand...

In fairness to Lewis though, the times would have meant that he would fight more often, earlier in his reign, and he would likely become the world champion much earlier. I think that realistically, like Louis, he would have learned a lot from a Schmelling loss, and i think he has the size and power to hold onto things in later years. There are some huge assumptions, but he is probably the second best chance to do things, although i agree that focus is his biggest problem. Tony Galento might be an extremely dangerous fight for Lewis!

Holmes had his hands full with the best fighters of his own era, and frankly I dont think they were as good as the best that Louis faced.

Click to expand...

AGreed, but he was a very good chance to do it (or at least as good as anyone). His problem is that as he slowed, he could be beaten. If Michael Spinks beat him, then you would have to think that Billy Conn was a very good chance, and certainly Walcott would be too. I dont think he coudl do it.

Why should we assume any of those things?

There were pleanty of awfull managers back then, and pleanty of opportunities for a guy like Tyson to get himself into trouble.

The bottom line is that once a champion looses focus like Tyson did, sombody s going to hand him his head sooner or later, and it dosnt necesarily take a great fighter to do it as Douglas proved. The most important atribute for a fighter wanting to match Louis's record, would be ability to retain focus after he held the title, and Tyson didnt have it.

Well he certainly would have ripped through the early opponents. Schmelling included, probably. And by the time of his lack of focus Douglas fight came, there would be no big huge superheavies to take advantage of him. It would be certainly interesting to see who would take out Tyson in that era. It is often forgotten that it wasnt until Holyfield beat Tyson that he was seen as vulnerable. And i am not so sure who would have taken Holyfields place. They would have need tremendous heart and chin. Walcott would have been a great chance, but I can see Tyson's power bailing him out. Same to for a Tyson Charles fight. Bear is exactly the type of fighter to upset Tyson, but he came along earlier. And i dont think Buddy Baer was too good a chance. I think he might have a better chance than most realise, when i think about it.

Again, Johnson was inconsistent in his training habits in his own era. In practice he probably fights less often than Louis, against weaker opposition, and strings his title reign out over a similar period. Even in this scenario, it is verry likley that his training habbits let him down.

Click to expand...

This is a bit rough though. In Joes time, there would be no chasing out of the country, and Johnson could and would ahve been a lot more active. I give him a very good chance, although it is worth noting that he did seem to take longer to get going, which would be a problem. Remember the Choynski loss in particular which could have been repeated as may some of his other earlier losses. But once he got going, i do think he had the ability to repeat the successes. You are right about lack of training being the big problem, but would this have been such a problem if he wasnt hounded from his own country? I think he might be a chance to go pretty close, and outside of ali, i think he is the best chance to replicate things.

Yes, there are fighters as good as Moorer in every era.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Better usually.

Again, looking at Foremans career I have doubts about him sustaining the level of activity and allso this is an era with a lot of slick boxers.

Click to expand...

If Jimmy YOung beat him, why wouldnt Conn do the same thing? I cant see Foreman getting out of jail in the last round.

The problem with Marciano and Frazier is that their styles do not suit longevity. In Fraziers case for example, the Cummings fight would fall within the period of Louis's title reign.

Click to expand...

Agreed, though i think Marciano is a chance at going 49-0 and then retiring.

If Dempsey takes three years out to play around in Hollywood, then sombody is taking him out.

Click to expand...

You are probably right, but let us not forget what Dempsey did to Sharkey after the three years. Tunney may have been the all time great who could do to Louis what Conn just failed to do. So, without Tunney, if Dempsey did meet a Conn, it is quite likely that his power would also bail him out of this. And who knows when it would stop. it is rumoured that Dempsey once KOd Tony Galento, who was a louis victim. So, you cant totally discount Dempsey finding a way and preserving enough of himself to struggle through the later years.

Again, the problem with Liston is that he completely lost focus once the title was in his hands. Fighters like that find a way of bringing themselves down to the level of their opposition.
Click to expand...

And he seemed to have a way of being caught in fights he should have won. Liston is going to really struggle to stop Schmelling, BAer and Braddock from doing what Marty Marshall did, and the older Liston is going run into a Leotis martin style punch somewhere along the line, you would think.

Some other guys who deserve consideration:
John L Sullivan - a better chance than most give him credit for. In fact there is unlikely to be the Schmelling blip. But surely alcohol must catch up to him at some stage, meaning he will fall short, probablyto a master boxer. Does Conn fit this description?

Jim Corbett - Has the skills and longevity but probably not the chin. You would think that someone woudl catch up to him somewhere along the line.

Bob Fitzsimmons - at his own weight, he probably replicates the feat and possibly then some, but at heavyweight, someone is going to last the distance and land, and you would also think more importantly the early challengers Louis took on, would cause problems for a tiny Fitzsimmons. Still, if Fitz guided himself through the early years, it might be difficult to see him running into his Jeffries style giant that stopped him. His power might just bail him out agaisnt quite a few of Louis's opponents. He might give it a better shake than anyone realises.

Tommy Burns - In fairness to Tommy, he isnt going to do it, but it isnt from lack of trying!

Michael Spinks - Here could be a bit of an upset pick. Spinks had the ability to beat the big guys early on, adn the longevity to stick with it. The likes of Baer, Braddock, Schmelling I and 2 & Co early on in the reign are the biggest test and later tests like Conn, Walcott and then Charles are also going to be massive tests, but most of the guys he faces are not going to be too much heavier than what spinks fought as a light heavy, so his chances cant be totally discarded.

Roy JOnes is another darkhorse, but somewhere along the line, his chin and/or speed is going to fail him and we have seen these results.

James Toney wasnt good enough as a heavy and is almost certainly failing the early schmelling/Baer tests because he simply wasnt good enough to beat these guys, at any point in his career.

strangely enough, the Klitchskos might be the next best chances, to replicate the feat. Wlad probably gets KOd and Vitali is unlikely to make it, but each does have a chance.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

mr. magoo · Nov 29, 2010

I think Muhammad Ali could have replicated Louis's reign, given the same list of opponents. Ali won the heavy weight title, at age 22 with only 19 pro fights, against a man who was more dangerous than Baer or Carnera, who Louis faced with 20 plus bouts behind him. He would retire as heavy weight champion 14 years later at age 36. Had it not been for the interruption of a 4 year exhile and the obligation of facing men who were infinately better, I don't think that he would have picked up a loss during the span that Louis was champion. Incidentally, I don't see Holmes at 27-0 losing to Max Schmeling the way that Louis did with the same number of fights, and possibly not even being bested by Carnera or Baer with only 20 bouts.

janitor · Nov 29, 2010

Most of your observations are not a million miles from my thoughts, so I wont respond to all of them. The other fighters that you have mentioned invite further comment however.

Some other guys who deserve consideration:
John L Sullivan - a better chance than most give him credit for. In fact there is unlikely to be the Schmelling blip. But surely alcohol must catch up to him at some stage, meaning he will fall short, probablyto a master boxer. Does Conn fit this description?

Click to expand...

Sullivan might in fact have defended the title more times than Joe Louis.

I do think that he fought in a verry weak era however, and this alowed him to get away with lapses in his preparations that would have been punished in a deeper era.

I think that his drinking would ultimately have curtailed his career in any event.

Jim Corbett - Has the skills and longevity but probably not the chin. You would think that someone woudl catch up to him somewhere along the line.

Click to expand...

Tend to agree.

Bob Fitzsimmons - at his own weight, he probably replicates the feat and possibly then some, but at heavyweight, someone is going to last the distance and land, and you would also think more importantly the early challengers Louis took on, would cause problems for a tiny Fitzsimmons. Still, if Fitz guided himself through the early years, it might be difficult to see him running into his Jeffries style giant that stopped him. His power might just bail him out agaisnt quite a few of Louis's opponents. He might give it a better shake than anyone realises.

Click to expand...

Again, a valid observation. I think that he would almost certainly have spent most of his early career at middleweight and light heavyweight though.

Michael Spinks - Here could be a bit of an upset pick. Spinks had the ability to beat the big guys early on, adn the longevity to stick with it. The likes of Baer, Braddock, Schmelling I and 2 & Co early on in the reign are the biggest test and later tests like Conn, Walcott and then Charles are also going to be massive tests, but most of the guys he faces are not going to be too much heavier than what spinks fought as a light heavy, so his chances cant be totally discarded.

Click to expand...

I could see Spinks having his handfull at light heavyweight in this era with the likes of Conn, Bettina, Lesnevich and Fox around. Your points stand, but it seems a bit of a reach for me personaly.

strangely enough, the Klitchskos might be the next best chances, to replicate the feat. Wlad probably gets KOd and Vitali is unlikely to make it, but each does have a chance.
Click to expand...

I am going to half agree here.

Vitally would not be able do it because the schedule would break him before he even got into the ring for these fights.

Wlad is proving prety good in the longevity game, but I suspect that he would alwaus have picked up a couple of losses early in his career. There is always going to be a Purity or a Sanders out there to trip him on the way up.
Click to expand...

janitor · Nov 29, 2010

mr. magoo said: ↑

I think Muhammad Ali could have replicated Louis's reign, given the same list of opponents. Ali won the heavy weight title, at age 22 with only 19 pro fights, against a man who was more dangerous than Baer or Carnera, who Louis faced with 20 plus bouts behind him. He would retire as heavy weight champion 14 years later at age 36. Had it not been for the interruption of a 4 year exhile and the obligation of facing men who were infinately better, I don't think that he would have picked up a loss during the span that Louis was champion.
Click to expand...

Ali, I kind of get a pass with because I have suggested him as a candidate in my initial post. The issue would be whether he would pick up an early loss through being moved allong more quickly.

Incidentally, I don't see Holmes at 27-0 losing to Max Schmeling the way that Louis did with the same number of fights, and possibly not even being bested by Carnera or Baer with only 20 bouts.
Click to expand...

Here I have to disagree. Holmes was a comparativley slow developed and I really dont think that he would have been ready to face Carnera, Baer or Schmeling in his first two years as a pro.

Baer and Schmeling would have been dangerous matches for him on the best day he ever saw.
Click to expand...

mr. magoo · Nov 29, 2010

janitor said: ↑

Ali, I kind of get a pass with because I have suggested him as a candidate in my initial post. The issue would be whether he would pick up an early loss through being moved allong more quickly.

Here I have to disagree. Holmes was a comparativley slow developed and I really dont think that he would have been ready to face Carnera, Baer or Schmeling in his first two years as a pro.

Baer and Schmeling would have been dangerous matches for him on the best day he ever saw.
Click to expand...

All of the above are valid points, and I don't know if Ali or Holmes could have beaten Carnera, Baer, or Schmeling within their first two years as professionals, but with the same number of fights as Louis had in those matches, they'd have my full confidence. I think Ali had been fighting for about 4 years when he faced Liston, and not 2. But, he was still only about 22 years of age and with only 19 bouts, yet dominated a man who most would pick to beat Carnera, Schmeling, Baer ( and perhaps Louis. ) Holmes had likewise been fighting for four years when won the title, but had the same number of fights that Louis had when he lost to Schmeling. If you're going by time spent as a pro, and not number of fights then, there might be a case. But regardless of the time frames, neither of those men had any more experience than Louis, when winning the title.
Click to expand...

Swarmer · Nov 29, 2010

I think Schmeling would have given Holmes a really rough rough time. That right hand of his was Holmes' wolfbane, and I have doubts about his ability to handle Max's counterpunching.

janitor · Nov 29, 2010

Schmeling would have liked Holmses style, and would definitely have seen a few curveballs to throw him.

Stevie G · Nov 29, 2010

janitor said: ↑

Joe Louis held the heavyweight title for 11 years, which is about the same period of time that Margaret Thatcher was prime minister. That in itself should provide some frame of reference for how deeply his title reign would have been etched upon the consciousness of contemporary boxing fans. Not only did Louis have the longest title reign of any heavyweight champion, he also had the longest title reign of any champion in any weight class, including the era of multiple title belts. This was done despite the fact that he fought a consistently high level of opposition. In all he fought 33 opponents who were currently ranked in the top 10 by Ring Magazine, and all but two of them were fought in the period before he retired as champion.

So what do you have to do to match his record?

What you would have to do?
Joe Louis defeated Max Baer 14 months after he turned professional and he defeated Jersey Joe Walcott 13 years later when he was well past his prime. Both of these fighters are top 30 all time heavyweights and he was fighting a consistently high level of opposition in between.

He was defeated by Max Schmeling in his second year as a professional fighter and would suffer his next defeat at the hands of Ezzard Charles 14 years later. The three fighters who defeated him all won the lineal heavyweight title outside of their fights with Louis and were top 30 all time heavyweights.

Before his induction into the army Louis defended the title 4.5 times a year on average and the majority of his challengers were ranked contenders.

What it would take?

It would have taken the ability to retain focus and train hard after you had won the title, so Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, Mike Tyson and Riddick Bowe are excluded.

It would obviously have taken a style suited for longevity, so Rocky Marciano and Joe Frazier are excluded despite their superior training habits.

It would have taken a chin that would not allow the punchers chance to prevail, which rules out Lennox Lewis.

It would take the ability to cope with fighters of every size, shape and style imaginable.

It would take the ability to beat elite fighters nine months into your professional career, unless you would stagger the whole title reign forward bodily by a year. It would have taken the ability to beat Max Baer 14 months in and Joe Walcott 13 years latter. That would exclude virtually everybody.

For most of the great champions, the question is not whether they could have matched Louiss record, but whether they would have even tried. Most would have taken easier fights less frequently.

Could anybody else have done it?

It is my opinion that the only heavyweight with a serious chance of replicating Joe Louiss title reign is Muhammad Ali, and that scenario is not without issues. Larry Holmes might perhaps have had the capacity for longevity, but I doubt that he would have taken on such stiff opposition so regularly, and if he had he would likely have lost at some point.

In summary I submit that Louis deserves his position at a consensus top two all time heavyweight, either based on resume or head to head.
Click to expand...

Muhammad Ali,with his career uninterrupted,has the best case here. Closely followed by Larry Holmes.

janitor · Nov 29, 2010

Stevie G said: ↑

Muhammad Ali,with his career uninterrupted,has the best case here. Closely followed by Larry Holmes.
Click to expand...

Thats prety much how I see it.

Stevie G · Nov 29, 2010

Dempsey1238 said: ↑

I think Walcott should have goting a 3rd match.

Leading to round 11, Louis was down and and loseing on points. Louis luck out when Walcott traded with him in round 11 and Louis made sure Walcott would not get out of that exchange with out a knockout or at least a knockdown.

It was almost like Louis Conn I all over again.
Click to expand...

A third fight between Louis and Walcott could easily have happened. While Walcott and Ezzard Charles had the title sewn up between them. If Walcott had won their first and second fights instead of the latter two,a comebacking Louis would have fought him instead of Charles. With that scenario the result would have read Walcott dec 15 Louis.

mr. magoo · Nov 29, 2010

Earlier today, I gave Holmes a good chance at replicating Louis's title reign, but after giving it more thought, I have since reconsidered. Holmes did not peak until he was already about 28-29 years of age, and started to decline around 33, so that wouldn't make for a 12 year reign.

Dempsey1238 · Nov 29, 2010

Bokaj said: ↑

You make some very good points, Janitor. Those points are why I have Louis in my top 10 p4p. Fantastic fighter.

If the whole draft thing didn't happen we would know by now if Ali could have equalled or even surpassed Joe's great record. As you suggest, I think it boils down to if he could have kept his focus long enough.

In the 60's Ali always was in shape when fighting, but after the lay-off it was a different story. That was probably partly down both to getting more complacent with age and getting used to more comfortable habits during the years he was away from boxing. So the question is for how long he could have kept the focus he had at least until 67'.
Click to expand...

Not sure on that, if you want to take the draft from Ali, than by all rights, lets have Louis not join the army in WWII. It was pretty much the same break between them, 3 years about.

Who knows how many title defenses Louis could have made in the 3 years in the army. The record may well have been 35 ot 37 perhaps. Might I dare say 40?

Dempsey1238 · Nov 29, 2010

And going by this, we do have to take 3 years away from the champion in Louis's time.

Marciano as champion will be drafted for 3 years, coming out of the army, how will the break effect him?

Ali in Louis's time, will have the same problem, the 3 year break, joins or fights it, same result, 3 years.

Dempsey ete.

Log in or Sign up

Why nobody could have matched Joe Louis's record

Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

Swarmer Patrick Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Why nobody could have matched Joe Louis's record

Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

Swarmer Patrick Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

janitor VIP Member Full Member

Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member