Joe Louis is The Greatest Boxer Of All Time!

Toney had no business at Heavyweight, the Jirov win is class no doubt.

When I say such things about Sanders I am laughed at. But what I wouldn't do is take a hypothetical version of any boxer and use him in a match up. I just use them as they were. If that guy came up sparring modern opponents with good records who fought modern opponents with good records and so on they maybe. But he didn't. He fought in an era riddled with Cruisers and bums, he was a victim of his time. Except that Purrity never went up and won against quality opponents. Basically WK lost due to punching himself out. (One of the downfalls of carrying extra muscle due to weight lifting). Still. If he paced himself better WK would have won every round against Purrity. Baer, on the other hand, actually fought and beat top opponents. Max Schmelling is a bonified ATG fighter. (TOP 25 if not better).

Good thing heavyweight physiques have progressed to the level they are at today: http://cdn2.cagepotato.com/wp-content/uploads/James_Toney.jpg http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Alexander+Povetkin+Alexander+Povetkin+Vs+Wladimir+5Zt5ygOpA3Tl.jpg Indeed: http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Chris+Arreola+Paul+Williams+v+Winky+Wright+ZpnCow3bvcPl.jpg http://beatsboxingmayhem.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/klitschkosolis.jpg

Alright I will level with you, I don't think a drunken street fighter could beat Louis LOL. But I do believe this... Joe Louis could NOT be a professional boxer at HW today. Not the way he was conditioned and not the skillset that he fought with and not at the weight he fought with. That is a definite fact. You could say stuff like Louis today would have modern skills, athleticism and size because of modern training, nutrition and medicine. And through sparring modern opponents. But I would counter that the resulting fighter would no longer BE Joe Louis, he'd be a different fighter. The Joe Louis that WAS could not be a professional HW boxer today! That is a fact. He MAY be an elite level CW boxer however. As I stated at the top of the thread, this is very plausible. I guess we disagree here. Their conditioning was fantastic. Isn't funny that what's old is new again? They didn't use weights. Cross-training and pliometrics was how they trained.

he is "skinny/fat" no muscles, watery body, no weight. A product of the MORONIC training methods of the day. Good thing heavyweight physiques have progressed to the level they are at today: http://cdn2.cagepotato.com/wp-content/uploads/James_Toney.jpg http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Alexander+Povetkin+Alexander+Povetkin+Vs+Wladimir+5Zt5ygOpA3Tl.jpg

That Denium guy is going to be in "Denial" now (I know it was a **** joke LOL) Suddenly Ring Magazine looks so smart anymore does it mate? All those Historians that told you this stuff and now you can actually SEE how they led you astray. I would be angry too LOL. I wonder what Ray Corso would say? He tried to tell me once that "boxing skills PEAKED in the 30's!" Yeah Ray, it certainly LOOKS like it LOL Back in the 1930s everyone knew Max Baer didn't take his training seriously. Every one knew that he relied on his punch (and the fear of it). He would throw it and try to get inside the counter. Was he the 1930s version of Wilder? Yes/No. His story is complicated. He had skills. Didn't always use it and relied on power. He didn't train well and some people say he never recovered as a boxer after Schaaf died. One fighter (Campbell I believe) was killed in the ring by Baer and Schaaf died a couple months after a fight in which he was brutalized by Baer. After that, it's said that he never was the same fighter again: drinking and partying more, etc... Nobody said that every fighter in the 1930s was better than every fighter in the 2010s. And if they did that would be stupid. Another thing Max Baer is not in anyone's TOP 10. The highest I've seen him is 20 or so and that is too high. You have to judge a fighter on his entire career. Some have a short period of greatness (Mike Tyson) some have a longer period of greatness (Hopkins) and some make it on consistent excellence (WK).

The more rounds a boxer has to fight, the weaker they are, OBVIOUSLY, Well that makes sense.

Ali does by far followed by Holyfield. Yeah that probably looked like I slighted Charles there. He's actually one of my favorite fighters. Was Jersey Joe a great heavyweight though? Sure he beat an older Charles what 2 out of 6 times? Charles beat an old Louis so it's not really fair to hold him above Joe in that regard. I obviously think he is still great. I pointed out that he's still around the middle of the top 10. I just think it's interesting that Noone ever brings up his lack of competition when guys like Wlad and Tyson get killed for it. Your comments about Baer and Galento show who's really bias here. I have seen tons of older fights. I'm not just going off boxrec. Thanks for not trolling, I appreciate discussions, especially if somebody disagrees with me. Joe Louis is universally recognized as a top 2 HW ATG , around the middle of a top 10 is very low in my opinion, but that's not where I want to go. Saying that Tony Galento would beat most of the guys in Wlad's resume was an obvious a bait, an exaggeration, but even Tony would beat guys like Pianeta , Wach, Lepai etc. Tyson was knocking people out right and left, has a few big names in his resume, still is not generally considered a top 10 HW ATG. As for Max Baer , he was much better than what you give him credit for, he was a solid contender when there was but one champion. I'm not here to hate on Wlad, but he can be considered a top 10 ATG at best, no need to rewrite history, no need to say he's the GOAT, nowhere close. Braddock, Schmelling, Billy Conn, Godoy and even Carnera are all much better than Wlad's average opponent. Who has Wlad beaten? Byrd , Haye in a fight in which he never engaged, Povketin in a fight that was unwatchable at best. Chagaev? , Thompson? ... all he has are ok wins at best and a long series of mismatches. Really, I don't think it's enough to rewrite history or to make such claims.

Max Baer was not a bum. He was talented and had great power. His problem was motivation and training. He had a weakness for girls, dancing and having a good time (as opposed to training). A motivated Max Baer might very well have been an ATG. When I say such things about Sanders I am laughed at. But what I wouldn't do is take a hypothetical version of any boxer and use him in a match up. I just use them as they were. If that guy came up sparring modern opponents with good records who fought modern opponents with good records and so on they maybe. But he didn't. He fought in an era riddled with Cruisers and bums, he was a victim of his time.

He was conditioned enough to go 20 rounds, unlike most modern HW's who start blowing out their arse after 4. He was also far more active than today's fighters, regularly fighting 5+ times a year. I also doubt that a boxer of Louis's calibre would lose/gas against fighters like Ross Puritty, Corrie Sanders & Lamon Brewster. As if he would not be blown completely out by such fighters. Even Puritty. None of the giants Louis fought were as tough as Ross. The more rounds a boxer has to fight, the weaker they are, OBVIOUSLY, another moronic statement. 15 to 12 rounds as argued with the OTNB who support Ali is negligible. But 20 rounds is strikingly weak. Besides, how many boxing matches REALLY went 20 rounds and how long were these rounds? Then we can look at Joe Louis... He does not LOOK like a professional boxer as we would describe him today. Not like the thick bull types, not like the ripped to shreds slicksters. he is "skinny/fat" no muscles, watery body, no weight. A product of the MORONIC training methods of the day. And rudimentary boxing skills, because boxing was nowhere near even a completed sport then!

Ali does by far followed by Holyfield. . Holyfield fought a great resume. He didn't beat them all. Ali fought a bum and cruiser resume, today it would be considered laughable, with very few decent opponents.

B-Bomber... LOL Geez.. And I thought Laced Up, Ray Corso and OneMoreRound were absolute retards... Possibly the dumbest poster on any boxing forum. Max Baer and Tony Galento would never even make it to the top of AMATEUR boxing let alone professional world championship boxing. Anybody who doesn't know who Galento is reading this, please google him up and take a look at who Bomber guy think would "take Wlad's resume" LOL Max Baer was not a bum. He was talented and had great power. His problem was motivation and training. He had a weakness for girls, dancing and having a good time (as opposed to training). A motivated Max Baer might very well have been an ATG.

Man, Im not even going to discuss the validity of this statement, it's clearly false but damn that video was HILAAAAAAAAARIIIIIIIIIOUUUUUUUUUUUUUS

Alright I will level with you, I don't think a drunken street fighter could beat Louis LOL. But I do believe this... Joe Louis could NOT be a professional boxer at HW today. Not the way he was conditioned and not the skillset that he fought with and not at the weight he fought with. That is a definite fact. You could say stuff like Louis today would have modern skills, athleticism and size because of modern training, nutrition and medicine. And through sparring modern opponents. But I would counter that the resulting fighter would no longer BE Joe Louis, he'd be a different fighter. The Joe Louis that WAS could not be a professional HW boxer today! That is a fact. He MAY be an elite level CW boxer however. As I stated at the top of the thread, this is very plausible. He was conditioned enough to go 20 rounds, unlike most modern HW's who start blowing out their arse after 4. He was also far more active than today's fighters, regularly fighting 5+ times a year. I also doubt that a boxer of Louis's calibre would lose/gas against fighters like Ross Puritty, Corrie Sanders & Lamon Brewster.

Who has the best HW resume of all time, in your opinion? Ali does by far followed by Holyfield. What's your point exactly?. Jersey Joe Walcott is a great fighter by the way. Max Baer would have whooped every single fighter Wlad has faced, probably even Wlad himself. Even Tony Galento would be likely to go trough Wlad's resume with rlative ease. And what great fighter did Marciano beat exactly, apart from an old, shot Louis?. Frazier has a win over Ali , isn't Ali a great fighter?. Your logic is flawed and borderline ludicrous. -Even- Charles? what do you mean? Ezzard Charles fought and beat Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jimmy Bivins ... and he started as a MW. You are entitled to your biased opinion, but show some respect for the men who wrote the history of the sport. Yeah that probably looked like I slighted Charles there. He's actually one of my favorite fighters. Was Jersey Joe a great heavyweight though? Sure he beat an older Charles what 2 out of 6 times? Charles beat an old Louis so it's not really fair to hold him above Joe in that regard. I obviously think he is still great. I pointed out that he's still around the middle of the top 10. I just think it's interesting that Noone ever brings up his lack of competition when guys like Wlad and Tyson get killed for it. Your comments about Baer and Galento show who's really bias here. I have seen tons of older fights. I'm not just going off boxrec.

Well then you truly are an idiot. Joe Louis at the very least was a professional boxer who dedicated his life to training. There's no way an average bar room brawler would 'wallop' him. Have you actually re-read the stuff you're posting? If you think Wlad would beat him, fine, i have no problem with that opinion. However coming out with stuff like the above is just daft. Alright I will level with you, I don't think a drunken street fighter could beat Louis LOL. But I do believe this... Joe Louis could NOT be a professional boxer at HW today. Not the way he was conditioned and not the skillset that he fought with and not at the weight he fought with. That is a definite fact. You could say stuff like Louis today would have modern skills, athleticism and size because of modern training, nutrition and medicine. And through sparring modern opponents. But I would counter that the resulting fighter would no longer BE Joe Louis, he'd be a different fighter. The Joe Louis that WAS could not be a professional HW boxer today! That is a fact. He MAY be an elite level CW boxer however. As I stated at the top of the thread, this is very plausible.

No, Louis was a serious boxer at the time. But I have SEEN better fighters than Joe Louis at bars across my home town. I am dead serious. There are guys on the street who'd wallop Louis today, you can SEE that. Well then you truly are an idiot. Joe Louis at the very least was a professional boxer who dedicated his life to training. There's no way an average bar room brawler would 'wallop' him. Have you actually re-read the stuff you're posting? If you think Wlad would beat him, fine, i have no problem with that opinion. However coming out with stuff like the above is just daft.

Joe Louis was a drunken, talentless bum. Yeah ok buddy. I have no interest in debating idiotic redbars like yourself. I'm just going to assume that you're a troll. No, Louis was a serious boxer at the time. But I have SEEN better fighters than Joe Louis at bars across my home town. I am dead serious. There are guys on the street who'd wallop Louis today, you can SEE that.

If he states he finds WK boring and so didn't LIKE him, fair enough. If he states that WK being boring as the REASON he doesn't RATE him, then Bert has admitted that his RATING is completely useless by his own words! Words which ppl like you lap up as FACT, which were obviously false from the start. Weltschmerz brought up Bert Sugar, not me.

Bert Sugar was pretty biased when it came to Wlad. Sugar liked action fighters. He thought Wlad was boring, hence not rating him. If he states he finds WK boring and so didn't LIKE him, fair enough. If he states that WK being boring as the REASON he doesn't RATE him, then Bert has admitted that his RATING is completely useless by his own words! Words which ppl like you lap up as FACT, which were obviously false from the start.