Would you place Joe Louis above any of these guys, pound for pound?

Langford - No
Robinson - No
Armstrong - No
Greb - No
Charles - No
Walker - yes
Pep - maybe
Moore - No
Duran - No
Fitzsimmons - yes
Ali - maybe......
Burley - Yes
Benny Leonard - No
Ray Leonard - No
Barney Ross - No
Gene Tunney - No

 

Langford - nah.
Robinson - nah.
Armstrong - nah.
Greb - nah.
Charles - nah.
Walker - nah.
Pep - it is possible, very close either way.
Moore - it is possible, very close either way.
Duran - it is possible, very close either way.
Fitzsimmons - nah.
Ali - it is possible, very close either way.
Burley - yes.
Benny Leonard - it is possible, very close either way.
Sugar Ray Leonard - yes.
Barney Ross - it is possible, very close either way.
Gene Tunney - yes.

 

How do you figure that bodhi ?
In my opinion Benny and Ray Leonard has a better resume than Louis...beat better fighters.....
I like Louis a lot, I´m a big fan of his skills......

just my personal opinion...I would love to hear your thoughts....

 

Louis like most HWs get massively underrated, often taking men outweighing him by 40lbs is seen as 'its the same division', where as fighters who move up a massive 7lbs get long wankfesting threads about their achievement, or 1division champions dominanting a 5lb weight range are seen as good as an unlimited weight class, its not

Langford - I think its close, gaining weight doesn't make you P4P, Langford beat some very good fighters, and some good , I don't see his comp as better than Louis and Louis fought much bigger men too and was more dominant

Robinson - no not as complete or dominant

Armstrong - I think Louis had less flaws, competition wise its close

Greb - not enough footage

Charles - probably not Charles is more complete, his resume more depth, if they were equal in size Charles is probably the better, but close

Walker - Yes Louis is more complete, more dominant against his opposition and better in resume (wins)

Pep - Hard to compare, Louis was in the much tougher division, Pep is more complete and the better boxer though

Moore - Yes but close, Moore seems to get bonus points for longevity and his resume has great depth, I'm not sure he was as special as Louis peak for peak though

Duran - no not as complete, Duran's top wins are better

Fitzsimmons - without footage I'm unsure, but I'd bet Louis to be the better fighter of the 2 as he fought in a better more competitive era

Ali - No, Ali is more complete with a better resume

Burley - hard to compare these 2 really, I think Burley was the better boxer of the 2, but maybe less physically gifted, less dominant but with much better opposition and giving up more weight

Benny Leonard - hard to compare again with their different styles

Sugar Ray Leonard - Leonard is the better more gifter boxer P4P, better wins, both very dominant, edge Leonard

Barney Ross - Yes

Gene Tunney - Yes probably both have their flaws in their game. Tunney going for 2 weight classes looks better on paper but in reality he was never giving up massive amounts of weight in any of his fights. Louis has the longevity and greater depth of resume, Tunney, both very dominant, Tunney perhaps more so, close but go with Louis

 

agreed.

 

BEARING IN MIND JOE LOUIS IS IN MY TOP 5 OF ALL TIME:

Langford-yes

Robinson-no

Armstrong-no

Greb-yes

Charles-yes

Walker-yes

Pep-yes

Moore-yes

Duran-yes

Fitzsimmons-yes

Tunney-yes

Burley-yes

Benny Leonard-yes

Ali-no

Ross-yes

Ray Leonard-yes

 

I have him 11th

Above: Langford, Greb, Charles, Walker, Moore, Fitzsimmons, Burley, Benny Leonard, Barney Ross, Gene Tunney.


Below: Robinson, Armstrong, Pep, Duran, Ali, Sugar Ray Loenard

 

shame that isnt it ?....i have read so much about greb..

 

Well, I think Benny and him are quite comparable. Both long-time champs at their weight. Benny has a better resume but Louis has a record of defenses and reigned longer. I rank Leonard above him, wouldn´t mind it the other way though.

Ray has the best top wins but what hurts him, and not only in comparison to Louis, is his lack of depth in his resume and his longevity. Louis also has some unique accomplishments. Leonard has nothing to compare with that. IMO Louis ranks solidly above him. I love watching Ray fight though. Nearly as much as Louis. A bit sad that he had the retina problems, we got robbed of some great matches thanks to that.

 

Maybe Tunney and Burley. That's it.

 

Non of them. Maybe Burley.

 

When I make my all time great rankings I have a solid top 4.
1. Benny Leonard 2. Prenell Whitaker 3. Ray Robinson and 4. Ray Leonard. Beyond my list has a lot of flexability. I would consider most but not all of the boxers listed for my top 10. Looking over the names I think they al make the top 25. Louis would make the top 15.
In my opinion Louis is the best heavyweight in history, and as close to a fundementaly perfect boxer there ever was. His 26 (I think it is 26) stright defenses of the heavyweight championship is unmatched by anyone in any weight. Sure he fought some "bums' in those defenses but he beat some pretty good guys as well. As for hypothical match ups the guys I'd pick to beat him would only because they are much bigger than him.
Obiviously I would pick Robinson, Benny Leonard and Sugar Ray Leonard over Louis. Langford, Armstrong, Charles, Pep, Moore, Ali, Burley and Barney Ross alog with Louis and a few others are the boxers that get considered to fill the 6-10 spots. As for Greb, Walker, Duran and Gene Tunney. I fell Louis is a better boxer and has a better resume than them.

 

I feel exactly the same as you about this part. It seems like some asshat heavyweight snobbery trend here and I've never bought into it.

 

With or without his steroids?

 

I think the rest of your top ten would be......

Ali , RJJ, Floyd, Toney, SRR and Louis ?