Wlad Klitschko KO4 Joe Louis - P4P and H2H

Joe would last much more than 4 rounds! I can see him being ko'd in the 7th. Wlad is far too big for him, and possibly the biggest puncher he has ever faced.

 

I don't care about Wlad, I'm not even a fan, I'm just telling you straight facts mate.

Louis is definitley not quicker, watch some comparison tapes in detail, you'll find that Wlad gets off quicker, moves quicker and has much more handspeed.

Louis also made a ton more mitakes. Hell, he's a fighter from the 1930's and 40's, that's expected...

 

Its also convienently ignored that BREW didnt land **** until VLAD was ready to pass out ! :hi: Sup WEIGHT !:yep

 

:good

 

FW we get it, you're a Wlad hater. In these threads lately nobody has explained how a tub of lard like Tony Galento could shake up and floor a prime Joe Louis :huh :yep The ATG Louis in his PRIME?! Galento wouldn't even be able to get close to Wlad.
Tell me, since you're so objective :-(

I'm in my 50s and can move like Ali in his prime compared to Galento and some of the other big stiffs Louis faught. Now Conn could box, but he was a friggin SMW in their first fight. By his early 30s JL was slipping. Forget Wlad, many of todays HWs - h2h - could beat the early to mid 30s year old JL. And it wouldn't be considered a big win. If it wasn't for the Louis aura, most fans would say - why did <insert name> say Chagaev, beat up a good 35 year old CW? :rofl Louis was tops for his era - a weak, limited era. Nothing more or less. Lennox L would destroy Joe L.

box03 or compukiller, you got any rational, unbiased answers? No, ok that's what I thought. :tong

 

:yep :good

 

You're a Wlad nutthugger mate. Wlad moves quicker? Watch Louis against the Baer boys.

 

why not try and watch JOE against someone with a little boxing skill ! :bbb

 

While you make decent points for Wlad, you still leave some unanswered. So your telling me Wlads losses are against top oposition, all 3 of his losses came against low level competition especially Purrity who lost to every top level fighter except Wlad. While Wlad might be the best of this era he will never accomplish or even be thought of in the same breath as the great Joe Louis, joes superior boxing ability is far greater than Wlads you would have to be blind not to see that.

 

I am not a Wlad nuthugger. If you were impressed by what Louis did on film in comparison to the modern counterparts, then I'll just stop here before anything gets escalated.

 

No, claiming that size is the only factor is outrageous. That's the problem. D'Amato, Rooney, and Steward could all get together and explain to you why Holyfield would beat Wlad, and you'd answer "WLAD IZ BIGGER! HE WINZ!!p:!:"

It wouldn't be so bad if you just said it once and let reasonable people take it from there, but you don't. You're convinced that your obsession with size is the only important thing in boxing, so you repeat it page after tired page.

Look, I'm sorry that you're not capable of analyzing fighters from a technical standpoint. I really wish you could--it would make these conversations much more interesting. But since you can't, try to stand aside and let people who DO understand take over. That includes everybody from Amsterdam to Widdow_Maker and Decker, all of whom disagree with me.

:rofl :rofl :rofl

I'm a Klitschko hater now? Just the other day, Suge_White was trying to convince me I'm turning into a Klitschko nuthugger. You two need to come to some consensus--I'm getting confused.

Perhaps you're not trolling. A more accurate description is "Spamming". You're the Farmboxer of the General forum.

 

I would say louis is only in the top ten all time because of accomplishments. H2h, i dont think he can even make top 10.

 

H2H he's not even ranked. He makes the high ranking on my lists because I compare on an era to era basis what these fighters were to their era.

Now granted, if Louis were trained in the modern times, he'd obviously be up there with anyone, but this was not the case. Some boxing fans believe that the fighter that was Joe Louis in the 1930's is truly a top H2H HW, this is absolutely grade A ****ing absurd.

 

I disagree, as you know. It's a shame we were never able to finish that discussion. Since then, I've been looking at some more footwork trends from Patterson, Povetkin, and a few others and I'm seeing more commonalities with Louis.

 

Commonalities do not mean that they are equal. Tyson's style comes from 'Dempsey theory', Dempsey is obviously not on Tyson's level in any respect however.