Better Jab, Wlad Or Joe Louis?

[StarshipTrooper]

Just sweepingly calling an era weak is a weak argument, and obviously, Wlad has indeed paid for over-relying on his jab before. Sanders stepped in and threw hooks as Wlad jabbed and caught him, something Peter has done too, but Wlad is miles ahead of where he once was as far as doing that and has adopted some of his brother's subtle forearm parrying.

Ah hem. The era IS weak and the only people who argue otherwise are Klitschko apologists. This isn't even something legitimate boxing historians argue about: They're practically ALL in agreement that this era is the weakest for Heavyweights that they've ever seen.

If you could personally have anyone's jab - and jab alone - at your disposal, it's hard to pick over Wlad. Had he ever learned to follow up with his right hand he would have been REALLY scary, because his jab opens people's defense so effortlessly but he seems more content dwindling their confidence and facial flesh away than finishing it with a 1-2.

If I could have anyone's jab.....

Larry Holmes
Sonny Liston
Muhammed Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
George Foreman
Lennox Lewis

I would pick ANY of those before I picked Wlad's.

Poet

[JAB5239]

Ah hem. The era IS weak and the only people who argue otherwise are Klitschko apologists. This isn't even something legitimate boxing historians argue about: They're practically ALL in agreement that this era is the weakest for Heavyweights that they've ever seen.



If I could have anyone's jab.....

Larry Holmes
Sonny Liston
Muhammed Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
George Foreman
Lennox Lewis

I would pick ANY of those before I picked Wlad's.

Poet

I'd put Wlad above Jack, George and Lennox. Maybe even Ali and Louis, its arguable. I do however agree 100% about the level of comp he's faced. But it just can't be dismissed how easily he controls a fight with his jab. Not many have been able to do that regardless of their competition.

[Toe Injury]

Today's heavyweight division has only really existed for a couple decades. Before that it was effectively a cruiserweight or "supercruiserweight" division with an occasional tall guy or fat guy. Joe Louis was a cruiserweight. Compare his form to cruiserweights.

Boxing historians who point out 180-210 pound fighters had better form and speed than today's STANDARD 240+ pound heavyweight aren't amazing anyone with their knowledge. No****.

"It's weak."
"Why's that?"
"Cause look they're all... freaks and giants!"
"What about the 20 guys they all knocked out to get title shots, who were all 210 pound men with washboard abs and traditional stances and olympic credentials? Those guys weren't freaks."
"They're nobodies!"
"They're nobodies because the guys you think fight ugly beat the crap out of them. They might have been champions in the '70s."
"The guys who beat them suck!"
"Why?"
"Because they're big slow freaks!"

This goes on and on. It all ultimately boils down to aesthetics mattering more to most people than actual boxing effectiveness.

[JAB5239]

Today's heavyweight division has only really existed for a couple decades. Before that it was effectively a cruiserweight or "supercruiserweight" division with an occasional tall guy or fat guy. Boxing historians who point out 190-220 pound fighters had better form and speed than today's STANDARD 240+ pound heavyweight aren't amazing anyone with their knowledge. No****.

"It's weak."
"Why's that?"
"Cause look they're all... freaks and giants!"
"What about the 20 guys they all knocked out to get title shots, who were all 210 pound men with washboard abs and traditional stances and olympic credentials?"
"They're nobodies!"
"They're nobodies because the guys you think fight ugly beat the crap out of them."
"The guys who beat them suck!"
"Why?"
"Because they're big slow freaks!"

This goes on and on. It all ultimately boils down to aesthetics mattering more to most people than actual boxing effectiveness.

I disagree. Skills and stamina have taken a drastic decline in recent years. Most heavyweights today look to load up and go for the ko. When that doesn't happen most don't have a plan B, lack fundamentals and get tired much more quickly. There are exceptions of course, but Im talking about the majority.

[StarshipTrooper]

Today's heavyweight division has only really existed for a couple decades. Before that it was effectively a cruiserweight or "supercruiserweight" division with an occasional tall guy or fat guy. Boxing historians who point out 190-220 pound fighters had better form and speed than today's STANDARD 240+ pound heavyweight aren't amazing anyone with their knowledge. No****.

"It's weak."
"Why's that?"
"Cause look they're all... freaks and giants!"
"What about the 20 guys they all knocked out to get title shots, who were all 210 pound men with washboard abs and traditional stances and olympic credentials?"
"They're nobodies!"
"They're nobodies because the guys you think fight ugly beat the crap out of them."
"The guys who beat them suck!"
"Why?"
"Because they're big slow freaks!"

This goes on and on. It all ultimately boils down to aesthetics mattering more to most people than actual boxing effectiveness.

The Cruiserweight division is bogus. If you're over 175 you're a Heavyweight. Period.

I think we've pretty well established that you're what I refer to as a "size whore" ie. for you size trumps everything including ability. I've had "discussions" with a hundred posters of your ilk and you all have the same trait: You simply can't get past size.....which makes the discussion pointless.

Poet

[Toe Injury]

Your entire argument is that a 6'2" 190-210 pound man "looked better" in silhouette form than a 6'7" 240-250 pound man. We HAVE to go by looks to say for sure, since they didn't fight each other, didn't fight the same opponents, didn't even fight in the same (real) weight division. Without those real measuring scales, we can't use looks as evidence of "better" (more effective), only "better looking".

I include size and power as a matter of EFFECTIVENESS, therefore it does factor into "betterness". I also grant his opponents their vast size advantages over that of Louis. Not P4P, but absolute. Two different things.

My favorite division, historical through modern, is middleweight. "Size whore" has nothing to do with it, pointing out the obvious has a lot to do with it.

Lets put this into perspective. The weight gap between Joe Louis and Wladimir Klitschko was about 40-50 pounds depending on which point in Joe's career. That's not to be confused with the occasional fatass or anorexic giant that would pop up in those days; Klitschko is a world-class athlete fighting men the same size as him, many heavier. This about the same as the weight gap between Ray Robinson and David Haye (at cruiser or right above. What sort of imbecile would expect to watch each one on tape fighting men their own size, and accurately say that Robinson had a "better" anything, without taking into account the weight gap? Better LOOKING in silhouette form? Everything. Robinson was technically superior in every aspect to Haye.

More effective in an absolute physical sense (more damage dealt)? Possibly nothing. That's why boxing has weight divisions, you see, and why anything above 175 is no longer "heavyweight" given the dramatically increasing size of modern humans.

Form suffers with size, but range and power compensate, and range and power have redefined the HW division and stopped "would-be" Louis and Marcianos early in their careers. It deserves to be factored in when gauging both the Klitschkos and their opponents. I'm not using this for any reason other than to oppose the dismissal of modern heavyweights based on their larger size and equivalently suffering speed and form. Yours are more pleasant to watch, but effectiveness is harder to measure.

Now using that logic to cancel out the "inherent" inferiority of anything modern, and ignoring era and size, Louis was a more rounded boxer, but Wlad's jab has been more proven as a single, dominant weapon.

[Spartacus Sully]

wlads jab looks good because he can actually use it effectivly against his out of shape opponets. put him against some on who moves and his jab will be **** adamek or haye should prove this.

louis's jab is good against most any opponet once he started brining it back alittle higher and even before then it was still better then wlads.

[Scott9945]

wlads jab looks good because he can actually use it effectivly against his out of shape opponets. put him against some on who moves and his jab will be **** adamek or haye should prove this.

louis's jab is good against most any opponet once he started brining it back alittle higher and even before then it was still better then wlads.

Wladimir's jab will land often against Haye and anytime he wants against Adamek.

[Obama]

How the hell is this poll so close? A lot of you should be ashamed.

Wlad's jab against even Eddie Chambers was mediocre at best. Imagine someone with Chambers skill set and a punch he'd have to fear?

[Greatest1942]

wlads jab looks good because he can actually use it effectivly against his out of shape opponets. put him against some on who moves and his jab will be **** adamek or haye should prove this.

louis's jab is good against most any opponet once he started brining it back alittle higher and even before then it was still better then wlads.

I support this. Wlad becomes lazy with his jab often and paws with it, towards the end. Louis did serious damage with his jad and Wlad I don't know if he can manage that.

I will state one thing more too, the bigger the better theory is one of the worst things to happen to heavyweight boxing. After a certain weight you can never put your whole body into your punches anyway. The fascination with big heavy men being better is the reason the heavy weight boxing scene is so dull.