Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[HOUDINI563]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E-4DMPM2lns

[Rusty Tromboni]

You're missing the point. Fantasy matchups are just that, fantasy.

Every single boxing historian ranks greats based on what they actually did, not based on what they might have done or could have done. Because one is mostly factual and the other is complete fantasy.

That's why unaccomplished boxers who beat ATG's at their bests are not ranked above them.

That's why I even have a highly respected boxer like Louis in my top 10, because let me tell you something he wouldn't even be in my top 20 if I ranked him based on head to head matchups.

I look at him and see a VERY beatable boxer, while an admirer of his sees a near unbeatable boxer. See the massive difference in perception? But if we stick to what Louis actually did in his career i.e. his resume, then we would both be much closer to our judgement of Louis' worth as an ATG.

As for Dempsey, he fought in a weak era(as did Marciano and Louis btw) and doesn't have an impressive resume. He fought two greats, one wasn't at his best(Willard) and the other beat him twice(Tunney).

Sharkey and Gibbons were great fighters.

Gibbons is actually his greatest victory. Tunney himself thought so.

Definitely better than Buddy Baer, Earnie Terrell, David Bey, Mitch Greene, Rid**** Bowe, David Tua. All OK, if not simply bad, fighters who showed the true limit of men you rank over Dempsey.

[HOUDINI563]

When you are asked to defend Joe Louis you know this is the realm of very low boxing knowledge.

For anyone with a low opinion of Louis skills study up. The videos I posted are a good first step. You have a very long road to hoe.

[HOUDINI563]

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/louis_ibro.html

[BKM-]

Getting knocked down getting up and winning is a sign of AT greatness in actuality.

Yes but it's not the sign of being the most technically accomplished HW.

It is actually a huge sign of the boxer doing things that are technically insufficient.

Losing to Schmeling, a great fighter, who was either a leading contender or heavyweight champion for a decade is no shame. You forget to add that Louis in the return match won by 1st round KO.

You know what I also forgot to add? The way in which Schmeling beat him and you remember what that was?

A massive hole in this Joe Louis technical brilliance. keeping your left hand low enough to be vulnerable to right hands to the point where you're taking a terrible beating lasting 12 rounds untill a KO.

And no, the rematch was never a case of Louis proving that he fixed that. It was a past prime Schmeling who was frozen. Completely mentally out of it before the fight even started, turning into a punching bag for Louis due to the occasion.

You misinterpret that the reason Louis is rated by everyone who knows the sport top 2 is his long title reign and what he meant to America during the war years. Very false interpretation. Louis has the credentials but he is also the most technically proficient of any heavyweight champion. Very fine mixture of boxer and puncher. Could do it all. He could sidestep and counterpunch and knock an opponent dead with one punch from either fist. His combination punching is unsurpassed at any weight. Watch the video I posted.

See it doesn't make any sense what you're saying. He could do it ALL you say, yet still no mention of DEFENSE.

He got clipped too much and didn't have the chin to compensate. He was so technically perfect yet didn't know how to properly defend himself a lack of movement and proper hand placement to defend that massive skull.

Your only defense to this documented weakness is "well he got back up to win". No. He's nowhere near the GOAT in either terms, resume or ability.

[HOUDINI563]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2sWBlu4uzLY

[HOUDINI563]

Louis had an excellent defense. For a boxer puncher type fighter THE best.

Schmeling was one of boxing’s best right hand punchers and a great technically astute heavyweight. His bout with a Louis in 1936 was one of the greatest boxing displays.... ever.

Again and very honestly if you are that ignorant of what makes great boxing I can’t help you. Louis is rated so highly because he was that great technically. He could do it all. Watch the videos and articles I have posted. You have so much to learn.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2sWBlu4uzLY

[BKM-]

When you are asked to defend Joe Louis you know this is the realm of very low boxing knowledge.

Few people have the balls to actually ask at all. most boxing pundits fear to open their mouths because Joe Louis is a no-go in terms of criticsm. He's supposed to be untouchable.

How DARE anyone question the great humble fighter who beat the ****'s! Who brough whites and blacks together in America!

You have to blindly accept his force-fed legacy. If it's any other fighter, making statements like "He's the GOAT in his weightclass" or "he's the most technically proficient fighter ever" requires one to prove the extraordinary claims about the fighter. But not Louis, how DARE anyone question him in any way despite all the footage and info out there.

[HOUDINI563]

https://tss.ib.tv/boxing/articles-of...-a-great-boxer

[HOUDINI563]

Sorry. Can’t help you. You feel taking an way off the road opinion makes you intelligent. It really just means you are ignoring all the facts.

If you have a high speed modem look very closely at those videos. It’s a good first step along a very long road you need to traverse.