Larry Holmes VS Joe Louis

[NChristo]

All I know is that if Louis got to Holmes with a right hand like Shavers and Snipes did, he would finish the job.

This ^, Louis was much better at finishing then the people who knocked Larry down and wouldn't of gave him time to recover fully, also Louis was great at cutting off the ring and (imo) he would of got to Larry eventually as he ussualy sets his feet to throw a punch he's not too good at firing while on his toes and he's not going to avoid Louis like that.

[Sugarj]

Hi Sonnyboy, we all know Joe Louis didn't have the best chin either! I'd argue that the guys who put Holmes down were better than Tony Galento. Joe Louis was knocked out twice, Holmes only once.

I rate Holme's chin, yea he was decked by some mediocre talents but, baring prime Tyson.....he was never stopped in four decades in the sport.

Even both our fave's Ali was decked by mediocre talents. For me one measure of a good chin is getting up after being decked.

And great as Farr and Conn were, Larry was better at heavyweight. A nasty bag of tricks for even someone as great as Louis. If prime Larry turned up either of these nights in Louis's prime I'd put my house on him winning a decision, not a whisker of a doubt.

For me its a styles thing. I'd never state that Holmes was a better champion than Louis and certainly not a greater legend of the sport, and sometimes it seems like heresy to even suggest that someone would beat the great Joe Louis. Its just the way I see it based on the films I've watched.

As for Holmes' win over Norton, great performance by both. Norton's swansong, hell Norton didn't fight old, he looked as good as he did in 1973/76 in the Ali fights to my eyes. Big punchers were Norton's undoing, but he was cyanide to scientific orthodox 'boxers' like Ali and Holmes.

[TheGreatA]

Louis was knocked down more than a few times, but the only serious knockdowns that I saw him suffer were against Schmeling the first time and Marciano in his last fight. He would get up, almost as if he had been insulted by his visit to the canvas, and proceed to beat down his opponents immediately.

There's no question that Holmes's knockdowns against Snipes and Shavers were severe, and that he was in danger of being stopped. Shavers was know for his terrible finishing ability and Snipes, never a big puncher, was almost surprised that he had been able to knock Holmes down. One must admit that Louis would've done a better job at finishing than these men, as Tyson did against an older Holmes.

[sonnyboyx2]

every aspect of the sport taken into consideration it all points to Joe Louis... Louis jab was as good if not better than Holmes jab, Louis right-hand was twice the weapon of Holmes right-hand, Louis left-hook was 50 times what Holmes hook is, they are both the same height, same reach and around the same number of fights yet "The Brown Bomber` was unbeatable in his prime whereas Holmes was very beatable in his prime... i just cannot see how Holmes could win, he would have to go to Louis and fight which would be suicide because Louis would knock him out, Holmes could not do his Muhammad Ali impersonation in the hope of beating a guy like Joe Louis because Holmes done a very poor impersonation, he could not dance and fight at the same time like Ali could, Holmes was always a sitting target when up on his toes, Shavers, Tyson & Snipes cold-****ed him because he left himself wide open.. Nothin Holmes did in his career made him out as a fighter who could have beaten Joe Louis...Joe Louis would finish him in devastating fashion

[boxing boy]

Larry Holmes by UD or late round TKO.

[Sugarj]

Hi Sonnyboyx, I know neither of us will budge on this one. Its interesting to debate.

But when you say Louis was 'unbeatable' in his prime and Holmes was 'very beatable'..........well Louis was beaten in his prime, beaten badly by KO against someone only modestly talented in all honesty. Louis fans tend to say Louis was green when he fought Schmelling, but he was smashing up the rest of the division like Carnera, Sharkey and Baer! The Braddock victory was just around the corner too. Schmelling was good but I wouldn't give him a chance against even the Holmes who fought Mercer.

The fact is.....Louis didn't bring his 'A' game to meet Schmelling and look what happened.

Holmes was never beaten in his prime (1978-82) and it took till 85/86 to recieve his very first two debatable decision losses to Spinks. Please dont mention the Tyson fight, Larry was 38, two years inactive, very soft round the midriff and had what? Six weeks to prepare. Larry was not caught when he was dancing, he was caught when he stopped dancing by Mike! Larry was much better in the early 90s than this, when he prepared properly for his comeback!

He clearly didn't bring his own 'A' game to the Snipes fight.............but he still wins! He didn't bring his 'A' game to the second Shavers fight (he had already beaten him), but he wins conclusively! Hell, for anyone to box Shavers 23 rounds and only get knocked down once was hardly a disgrace.

Its hard for fighters to get 'up' for everyone they face. Who would have thought that Braddock and Galento would deck Joe Louis?

Holmes would surely approach a Louis fight with more caution than a Snipes, Shavers or a Bonecrusher fight for that matter. But I cant see Louis being any better than he was against Conn or Farr. Louis couldn't handle movers well, its just a fact........he didn't have the footspeed, or the reach for that matter. He had 76 inches vs 81 inches for Larry. Larry was taller too, in my pretty vast library I've never seen Louis listed above 6,2......but Larry is consistently 6,4 or 6,3 and a half.

Walcott would have give prime Louis nearly as many problems as he did post prime Louis. I'd argue that in 26 rounds of boxing Walcott possibly won more rounds than Louis did (to an objective viewer). Joe Louis was great against come forward fighters, but movers.....no way!

Granted Holmes wasn't quite as good at hitting and moving as Ali, but I'd rate him in the same league as Tunney or Walcott. The first Shavers fight and the Cooney fight were excellent examples of hitting and moving, he could do it very well when at his best. Its shocking how close Conn came to beating prime Louis.

Conn was only a blown up light heavy! Holmes would use the same tactics.....but is bigger, possibly faster, stronger and has a better chin. Its a no brainer. I defy anyone to objectively watch Louis vs Farr, then Louis vs Conn back to back. Then watch Holmes vs Shavers 1 or Holmes vs Cooney and then state 'Louis would knock him out'.

You mention Louis's arsenal too, yea great puncher! Heavier handed than Holmes, true! I doubt faster though! Pretty similar there to my eyes. But Louis's arsenal was far far better than the likes of Farr and Conn.......no comparison to be honest, yet he couldn't press the advantage much, he needed to be set before he threw.

But never mind, I've been wrong on heavyweight matches before........hell I thought Tyson would beat Holyfield and I gave Golota a good chance against Lewis.......so what do I know?! Ha ha

Its interesting that two video watchers like ourselves can see two fighters like Louis and Holmes and draw such different conclusions on who would win a matchup. I'm not a Holmes nuthugger at all, his personality and charisma could be shockingly offensive, but I still think he wins this fight prime for prime, but by decision. I dont see a KO/TKO.

[frankenfrank]

Hi Frankenfrank, the amateurs show up some very interesting results. In Ali's biography he claims to have been stopped in the second round the day after losing his ******ity!

As heavyweight boxers go, I'd rate Ali and Holme's chins as easy top ten entries.

Interesting result indeed , but we are talking about being stopped twice by the same white boy including a 1st round stoppage , both times with thick padded gloves and headgear. and it is a significantly smaller man. In the pros , I found even Holmes' stoppage wins fight awful to watch , and struggles against such men as old Norton , light heavy Spinks and old and small Shavers just enforce the doubt . Holmes would have lost to Frazier and especially to Tyson at every point of his prime. Holmes opposition was one of the strongest physically , but lousy technically .still I put him in my top10 but , as some know I am not a Louis fan at all , I give Louis a chance against him. I also give Holmes a chance against Louis , maybe the bigger chance , but considering Holmes' struggles which were almost as embarrassing as Louis' struggles , who knows ?

[sonnyboyx2]

Hi Sonnyboyx, I know neither of us will budge on this one. Its interesting to debate.

But when you say Louis was 'unbeatable' in his prime and Holmes was 'very beatable'..........well Louis was beaten in his prime, beaten badly by KO against someone only modestly talented in all honesty. Louis fans tend to say Louis was green when he fought Schmelling, but he was smashing up the rest of the division like Carnera, Sharkey and Baer! The Braddock victory was just around the corner too. Schmelling was good but I wouldn't give him a chance against even the Holmes who fought Mercer.

The fact is.....Louis didn't bring his 'A' game to meet Schmelling and look what happened.

Holmes was never beaten in his prime (1978-82) and it took till 85/86 to recieve his very first two debatable decision losses to Spinks. Please dont mention the Tyson fight, Larry was 38, two years inactive, very soft round the midriff and had what? Six weeks to prepare. Larry was not caught when he was dancing, he was caught when he stopped dancing by Mike! Larry was much better in the early 90s than this, when he prepared properly for his comeback!

He clearly didn't bring his own 'A' game to the Snipes fight.............but he still wins! He didn't bring his 'A' game to the second Shavers fight (he had already beaten him), but he wins conclusively! Hell, for anyone to box Shavers 23 rounds and only get knocked down once was hardly a disgrace.

Its hard for fighters to get 'up' for everyone they face. Who would have thought that Braddock and Galento would deck Joe Louis?

Holmes would surely approach a Louis fight with more caution than a Snipes, Shavers or a Bonecrusher fight for that matter. But I cant see Louis being any better than he was against Conn or Farr. Louis couldn't handle movers well, its just a fact........he didn't have the footspeed, or the reach for that matter. He had 76 inches vs 81 inches for Larry. Larry was taller too, in my pretty vast library I've never seen Louis listed above 6,2......but Larry is consistently 6,4 or 6,3 and a half.

Walcott would have give prime Louis nearly as many problems as he did post prime Louis. I'd argue that in 26 rounds of boxing Walcott possibly won more rounds than Louis did (to an objective viewer). Joe Louis was great against come forward fighters, but movers.....no way!

Granted Holmes wasn't quite as good at hitting and moving as Ali, but I'd rate him in the same league as Tunney or Walcott. The first Shavers fight and the Cooney fight were excellent examples of hitting and moving, he could do it very well when at his best. Its shocking how close Conn came to beating prime Louis.

Conn was only a blown up light heavy! Holmes would use the same tactics.....but is bigger, possibly faster, stronger and has a better chin. Its a no brainer. I defy anyone to objectively watch Louis vs Farr, then Louis vs Conn back to back. Then watch Holmes vs Shavers 1 or Holmes vs Cooney and then state 'Louis would knock him out'.

You mention Louis's arsenal too, yea great puncher! Heavier handed than Holmes, true! I doubt faster though! Pretty similar there to my eyes. But Louis's arsenal was far far better than the likes of Farr and Conn.......no comparison to be honest, yet he couldn't press the advantage much, he needed to be set before he threw.

But never mind, I've been wrong on heavyweight matches before........hell I thought Tyson would beat Holyfield and I gave Golota a good chance against Lewis.......so what do I know?! Ha ha

Its interesting that two video watchers like ourselves can see two fighters like Louis and Holmes and draw such different conclusions on who would win a matchup. I'm not a Holmes nuthugger at all, his personality and charisma could be shockingly offensive, but I still think he wins this fight prime for prime, but by decision. I dont see a KO/TKO.

Sugarj... i am one of Larry Holmes biggest fans so i aint knocking him...yes Billy Conn was only a light-heavy and gave Joe Louis big problems twice before Louis KOd him, yet Michael Spinks was also only a light-heavy and IMO he easily beat Holmes (10-5) in their first fight and also won their 2nd fight, Spinks "out-jabbed" Holmes in both fights he also beat Holmes at virtually every aspect of the game and no matter how long and hard fight-fans argue they think Holmes won, the truth is that Holmes himself thought he lost both fights..Bonecrusher, Snipes, Shavers, Witherspoon, Bey, Roy Williams, Ibar Arrington all hurt Holmes badly and none of them are in Joe Louis league... Earnie Shavers is IMO a Class C fighter with a Class A punch yet he had Holmes down and lasted 23rds with him, whereas Jerry Quarry took care of him in less than one round... many fight-fans claim Holmes to have the best jab in heavyweight history which IMO is terribly incorrect, Larry Holmes had a great jab when fighting opponents who had "No Jab" but when he fought an opponent who themselves had a decent jab then Holmes jab was not such a great weapon, Truth Williams, Bonecrusher, Witherspoon, Norton, Michael Spinks... which is why Holmes never agreed to fight Pinklon Thomas who had a Pole of a Jab...

i also think you are underestimating Max Schmeling a little bit he had some very good victories in his career.

Joe Louis was a hell of a fighter and most likely the most devastating puncher/finisher in history, i think he would get to Holmes at some stage and end the fight... i dont think many old boxing historians would take Holmes over Joe Louis... over Tyson, Holyfield, Lewis & Bowe yes but not over Joe Louis.

[Sugarj]

Hi Sonnyboyx, well I guess we agree on many things. Just not this one. Ha ha

I agree, most historians rate Louis higher. I do in a legendary sense, he was more dominant over his opposition than Holmes was and reigned longer. Frankly, even if Holmes were to beat Louis in a hit and move type of fight, I guess it wouldn't change anyone's perception of Louis, they'd just say it was a styles thing and that Holmes stunk his way to a victory. Louis would probably take Bonecrusher, Snipes and Williams to the cleaners in a more convincing fashion than Holmes........again, a styles thing.

I do think Schmelling was a good fighter, the Louis fight for me was his best performance. Great chin, great right hand. But his left wasn't too amazing. He was the sort of guy who could be outboxed by decent boxers like Sharkey or bombed out by decent sluggers like Baer. A good boxer of the era, but a legendary figure and human being.

[QueensburyRules]

Sugarj... i am one of Larry Holmes biggest fans so i aint knocking him...yes Billy Conn was only a light-heavy and gave Joe Louis big problems twice before Louis KOd him, yet Michael Spinks was also only a light-heavy and IMO he easily beat Holmes (10-5) in their first fight and also won their 2nd fight, Spinks "out-jabbed" Holmes in both fights he also beat Holmes at virtually every aspect of the game and no matter how long and hard fight-fans argue they think Holmes won, the truth is that Holmes himself thought he lost both fights..Bonecrusher, Snipes, Shavers, Witherspoon, Bey, Roy Williams, Ibar Arrington all hurt Holmes badly and none of them are in Joe Louis league... Earnie Shavers is IMO a Class C fighter with a Class A punch yet he had Holmes down and lasted 23rds with him, whereas Jerry Quarry took care of him in less than one round... many fight-fans claim Holmes to have the best jab in heavyweight history which IMO is terribly incorrect, Larry Holmes had a great jab when fighting opponents who had "No Jab" but when he fought an opponent who themselves had a decent jab then Holmes jab was not such a great weapon, Truth Williams, Bonecrusher, Witherspoon, Norton, Michael Spinks... which is why Holmes never agreed to fight Pinklon Thomas who had a Pole of a Jab...

i also think you are underestimating Max Schmeling a little bit he had some very good victories in his career.

Joe Louis was a hell of a fighter and most likely the most devastating puncher/finisher in history, i think he would get to Holmes at some stage and end the fight... i dont think many old boxing historians would take Holmes over Joe Louis... over Tyson, Holyfield, Lewis & Bowe yes but not over Joe Louis.

- - Interesting blast from past Lar fan.