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

Like Chris (or was it Sonny, it was i think) said, short and sweet - i love it.

 

How is it crap? It's obviously not. How many boxers throughout heavyweight history have been hit less often than him? I know someone is bound to come out with the age old excuse about his opposition being poor, but please avoid that for now.

Which heavyweights have a better defence than Klitschko?

 

I dont admit that.

I think that once he knew how these guys moved their goose was cooked.

 

But Janitor,

Schmeling badly whipped Louis, out boxed him then TKO’d him.

Pastor, who was not a great fighter, took Louis the distance in a close fight and made him look bad.

Conn would have beaten Louis if he had any brains, or if the fight was 12 rounds.

Walcott did beat Louis on points on a fair score card, but was robbed.

And of course, Charles badly beat on an older Joe Louis.

You have to admit the above, because it is the truth. Boxers gave Louis trouble. None of these guys had Klitschko's range or power.

 

Louis was still a works in progress at this stage, tho not too far from complete. This fight took him that one step further. Schmeling went thru a flaw in Joe's defense, and went thru it hard and often. This weakness was subsequently shored up, much like Lewi and McCall/Steward.

Louis didn't lose for another 14 years, umpteen defenses and umpteen fights.

By contrast Wlad has been poleaxed 3 times by fighters many would rate well the lesser of Max.

Louis also gained the ultimate revenge.

Wlad is ko'ed by 3 non greats.

Absolute speculation. If the fight was 12 rounds Louis may have gone harder, and as for brains Louis may have caught him later, there was still time. It's certainly far from a factoid.

Louis was way past peak, and even at this advanced stage righted things in a rematch. Wlad hasn't reached this career stage yet, and nonetheless this is far from the Louis we are matching against Wlad.

The worst version of Louis to grace the ring.

Mostly truth, definitely saving one item, but also agenda driven and selectively worded and chosen.

 

I wouldn't say that his defense is crap per say, but he does have the inordinate tendency to get nailed with left hooks a lot, and has been dropped some ten times in his career, or thereabouts. Louis could throw just about every punch imaginable. He wasn't just strong in one area, but had the most complete tool box full of different weopons. I think he could certainly land some very accurate and powerful shots on Klitschko.

 

With all due respect Mendoza, there are a lot of holes in this post. John Thomas already pointed out a few of them, but I bet I could probably tag on a few more. You speak a certain degree of truth, but are not telling the whole story.

Picking out selective facts, while omitting ones that don't support our beliefs is not the way to go.

 

Wlad by murder. This is a no contest. Joe Louis was great in his day and age, but Wlad has the benefits of modern day training techniques, weights, plyometrics, endurance, technique, and all other kinds of sports science applications that simply make him superior to Joe. It's like comparing a P-51 to an SU-27.

 

Are you a Slav? Just wondering..

 

Wlad is certainly a well developed athlete with a superb body, but he was also beaten by men who I wouldn't necessarily call modern day machines.

Corrie Sanders was 37 years old, frequently injured, only fighting on average maybe once annually over the previous six years, had no prior wins over true world beaters, and a recent loss to Hasim Rahman. Sure, he had fast hands and a dangerous south paw style, but these things don't exactly coincide with your argument about Wlad beating fighters soley due to modern day athleticism.

 

Its more like pitting a T rex against a Siberian Tiger.

The Siberian Tiger is the latest model smarter and more sophisticated but it is just going to get destroyed.

 

Did all this make his chin inpenetrable?

 

.

Really? Louis was coming off his best performance ever over Baer, and many thought Schmeling was washed up.

Yes, but how much of that had to due with him having his own ref who was biased as a judge, and Louis management being connected with MSG. Remember one of Louis managers went to jail for gambling. Too much smoke here. Yes, Louis got the " offical decsions " vs Godoy and Walcott, but he should not have been un-defeated for 14 years.

And Wlad fought better skilled punchers, real heavies over 200+ pounds, had no color line, did not have a bum of the month club, and didn't have anything close to Blackburn guiding his career for the get go.

Two were great punchers. The other was a bit of a fluke fight.

You could say that. I still say it was Conn who gambled when he should not have, and Louis was looking for the Ko, but only got it when Conn pressed it. IMO, if the fight was 12 rounds, I think Conn takes it on points.

It does not matter which version of Louis you use. Good boxers gave him fits pre-championship ( Waiter, Schmeling ) , during his championship run ( Farr, Pastor, Walcott, and Conn ) and post championship. ( Charles )

But it is true, Wlad has better power and range than any man Louis ever fought that could be called a boxer.

 

Magoo,

I have seen the fights, and read the reports. No, there are not a lot of holes on what went down in the ring because I have seen them and understand them.

Read my reply to John Thomas and you will see. Louis struggled with good boxers. This is not a selective fact. It is a fact with many examples. A true coloration if you will. There is not other way to look at it. There are some debatable points such as would Conn have won the decision if the fight had been 12 rounds. What is your take on that?

 

Again, you state facts but not the whole story. In your first post, you claimed that the first Walcott fight was a robbery, and that may very well be. However, you didn't mention that Louis, hadn't fought in 15 months, and only some 3 times in like 5.5 years. Yet, he still finished on his feet after 15 rounds, and put up a great effort against a future hall of famer. If Vitali Klitschko ends up losing to Samuel Peter, are you going to ignore the layoff, or will it become a token excuse? As for the Conn fight, did you happen to catch his schedule? He was defending his title on a monthly basis, and fought 6 times in 6 months, with little or no time to study his next opponent. I know it sounds like I'm going back and forth from not fighting enough, to fighting too often, but I think we can agree that there is such a thing as a more balanced schedule.

Most importantly, these are fights that Louis ACTUALLY WON, and what's more, destroyed them in the rematch. Wlad did not beat all of his opponents, and never even avenged all the fights that he lost.