Why was Joe Louis so lethal in rematches?

Ringside viewers had some split opinions on that fight being a robbery… @McGrain didn’t you have the links last time?

 

I thought we were talking about the rematch not the first meeting, I thought the first meeting was the one people say was a “robbery?”

 

My guess is a combination of, for want of a better expression, the law of averages and focus.

1. Law of averages - over 25 x defences Louis was bound to have some off nights. Nights when focus (see below), injuries and or a sub optimal camp meant he performed below his usual level. He was sufficiently far removed from the next best HWs of his era that he still won on those nights and typically didn't suffer another off night during the rematch.

2. Focus - or lack of in the initial fight. I.e. underestimating his opponent. I especially suspect this to be the case with Conn 1. Once an opponent had run him close or caused him significant problems, he was fully focused and properly prepared for the rematch.

 

He likely practiced more and implemented feedback/changes from his corner better than whoever it was he was fighting

There was a study done on the "best of the best", from the most successful therapists to guys like Michael Jordan, and it found what separated them was the time they spent practicing/training and their ability to accept feedback/willingness to learn

They actively sought out feedback from colleagues/trainers etc and put more time into the implementation of it and practicing, rather than going about like they already knew everything and didn't have room to improve

 

Good point. Not taking anything away from Conn's performance, but Joe had fought Baer just 3 1/2 weeks before, so hardly the greatest prep.