Wlad on his best night vs Prime Joe Louis, assessed with your head, not y'r heart.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Slothrop, Mar 14, 2008.


  1. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    Yes, because Joe was such a speedster.:roll:
     
  2. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
    As a finisher he was the fastest ever including Tyson.

    The last person you want to put Wlad in the ring with is the best finisher of all time.
     
  3. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    I'm confident Wlad would beat Louis 8/10. I just don't think Louis had enough defence or the chin to beat Wlad. Both have a weakness in their chins, but Wlad has the much superior defence.

    Wlad KO 4.

    Louis just isn't going to win this fight. It's one of those upsets I am 100% certain about. I'd like to know how people think Louis could win, because, like I said, I just can't see it happening.
     
  4. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    I'm talking as a fighter. Joe was actually quite slow of foot and reaction. His hands were great in combination, not a fast fighter in any other sense.
     
  5. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
    I dont think you are entirley right.

    Louis chose to be a ploder but on the few ocasions when he chose to use his footwork it was prety good.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R78hdxpRfws
     
  6. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  7. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    Not that i'd say Louis' defence was bad, but Wlad's defence is excellent.

    And by defence i mean everything involved in not getting hit, so that includes footwork, height, etc. Wlad gets hit terrible few times which is why he rarely drops rounds. During the last three years over six fights he has dropped no more than five rounds. I can't imagine him being down on the cards against someone like Conn.
     
  8. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    Janitor, the link doesn't work, and I also agree with Pontius that Wlad has the better defense. In fact, Louis's defense was one of the reasons I commented on his slower reflexes. He adopted a similar style(as was the style at the time) to a guy like Robinson: low hands, lower crouch, etc just without the reflexes or footspeed. Robinson himself didn't have the best defense. Louis's defense was quite open the way I see it.
     
  9. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
    Wlads defence is one dimensional. Put him against a fighter of similar reach and then we will see just how good it is. Louis had a far more multi faceted defence. Basicaly the whole textbook.
     
  10. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
  11. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    I pick Louis. He had less trouble with tall guys than with shorties who fought in a crouch. I think Blackburn would have Louis fighting very aggressively and Wlad doesn't seem to handle aggression that well. If Louis opts to get into a jabbing contest, Wlad's chances improve dramatically.
     
  12. slicksouthpaw16

    slicksouthpaw16 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,920
    16
    Jan 26, 2008
    Joe would be kept at bay and wouldn't get a chance to get off. He was always had a problem with quick pure boxers than this particular one of overwelme him.

    Too much size, power, strenght, and reach for Louis. Louis was also vulnerable to a right hand counter and his chin seemed to be shaky early on. His ability to recover was great but Wladimir would stay on him.

    Joe was only 6'1 and only weigned 190 LBS when he was at his best. Klitschko would be too much.

    If Wladmir was wide open, then Louis would have a chance at stopping him. But Wladimir was better defensivly than he was. Louis was able to knock out large fighters like Goody, Simon, Carnera ect because they were one dimensional and wide open punching bags.
     
  13. Jack

    Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,560
    67
    Mar 11, 2006
    No chance. Wlad just doesn't get hit. He may not be the most elusive boxer, but who was the last fighter to hit him clean regularly? His defence is ugly, but effective. Nobody has managed to get pastit yet, so I don't know if Louis could. Louis, however, was prone to right hands. Against Schmeling, how many rights did he eat before going down? It was ridiculous.

    Wlad's defence is on a different level to Louis'. Not that Louis' is bad, but just not as good.
     
  14. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,579
    27,233
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  15. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,110
    25,266
    Jan 3, 2007
    I'm not going to sugar coat things by saying that Louis was a much better fighter, but let's face it, this is a horrible matchup for Wlad. Louis had a far more technical arsenal than Klitschko did, and handedly destroyed men who were around his size, albeit not quite as athletic but still. By the time he landed a punch on Wlad, it would not just be a single shot, but multiple combinations to the body and head with great accuracy and force. Louis was a man who could stop a great fighter in a single round or beat him over 15. Wlad never did either to a truly great fighter. Now, I'm almost positive that Wlad's size, strength and boxing ability would trouble Louis and even land Joe on the canvas once or twice, but in the end, savy, talent and pure guts would prevail in favor of Louis.