Joe Louis Runs the Gauntlet

[Rusty Tromboni]

Tyson's whole career was built on using his small size to his advantage. I believe it was Teddy Atlas who once said,"there's less room for defensive error versus the smaller fighter". Ali said that Marciano was not nearly as great or as beautiful as him but because of his short height and awkward style he wasn't sure he could beat him.

LOL, Tyson is the perfect example of why fighters bulk up.


Even if I concede that Tyson had: 1) a better chin; 2) a harder punch; 3) a nastier disposition than Floyd. Do you really think the physical differences between them were that much?

They weren't. Tyson and Floyd and 16/17 were probably nearly identical in physical traits. Again, you might give the edge to Tyson, but not by much. Certainly, Floyd had the headstart in Boxing training.

But Floyd showed up pre-Liston. Obviously there have always been huge Heavyweights. But Liston ushered in a new era. With Tyson, Cus learned from his mistakes and produced a far, far more robust fighter. I bet a lot came from steroids. I don't doubt that a bit. But steroids really only serve to enhance training. Tyson trained harder than stone to develop a very robust body. Sure, he had speed and endurance to exploit his size (dis)advantage against bigger men. But if he hadn't packed on the 30 pounds of muscle, he would've been bullied just like Patterson had. And a lot chinnier; which is terrible for the peek-abo style.

It was a genius move by D'Amato. It defied a lot of Boxing logic. But it worked great. Tyson was Patterson 2.0

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -The Louis style was based upon efficiency, not stooopid meaningless showy footwork.

Same w/ Arguello. That's why when people say he struggled w/ movers, it's important to point to his record. Maybe the absolute slickest would consistently beat him. But he always found his man.

[Dempsey19]

LOL, Tyson is the perfect example of why fighters bulk up.


Even if I concede that Tyson had: 1) a better chin; 2) a harder punch; 3) a nastier disposition than Floyd. Do you really think the physical differences between them were that much?

They weren't. Tyson and Floyd and 16/17 were probably nearly identical in physical traits. Again, you might give the edge to Tyson, but not by much. Certainly, Floyd had the headstart in Boxing training.

But Floyd showed up pre-Liston. Obviously there have always been huge Heavyweights. But Liston ushered in a new era. With Tyson, Cus learned from his mistakes and produced a far, far more robust fighter. I bet a lot came from steroids. I don't doubt that a bit. But steroids really only serve to enhance training. Tyson trained harder than stone to develop a very robust body. Sure, he had speed and endurance to exploit his size (dis)advantage against bigger men. But if he hadn't packed on the 30 pounds of muscle, he would've been bullied just like Patterson had. And a lot chinnier; which is terrible for the peek-abo style.

It was a genius move by D'Amato. It defied a lot of Boxing logic. But it worked great. Tyson was Patterson 2.0

I already talked about floyd and Tyson.

I wasn’t talking about bulk I was talking about height. I think bulk is very important. I just don’t think Fury’s height makes him the best heavyweight ever. Me and Queenie’s whole argument was about height not about weight or bulk.

Floyd and Tyson actually proves my point since Floyd was a fair bit taller than Mike.

[New England]

louis would definitely have problems with foreman, holmes, and vitali klitschko. i think he beats everybody else up fairly badly aside from roy jones, who just wouldn't do anything and lose on points. too accurate, probably even too powerful for a lot of them, too. the man could crack.

[Rusty Tromboni]

As for the topic at hand, I can say for sure Louis beats every heavyweight before him and with relative ease.

Wow! That's quite the endorsement! Care to enlighten us how!? Especially a guy like Tunney. I've asked this question quite a bit, and no one steps up to provide an answer; no matter how emphatic the assertion. Hopefully you'll be the guy man enough to provide the evidence.

All the footage shows Tunney is bad news bears for Louis. Clearly, Louis needed guys who were too small to fight back, or so big that they got in their own way. Anyone who could move, or send return fire his way gave him problems.

I really don't know if Louis can figure out a prime Loughran, let alone Tunney.

How he goes against the hw monsters of today who knows. If given modern training methods and "vitamins" he might of ended up taller than 6'1, maybe 6'4 with the hgh if he had it pumped into him when younger and about 220-230. He'd stand a chance against anyone especially if he punched the same.

If you wanna take it there, sure, fine. those are a lot of what ifs. It starts to get too deep into the hypotheticals, for my liking. But I am sure other are comfortable engaging that debate. Think about it, if Dempsey came of age today and were trained by Anatoly Lomachenko, it's not unfeasible that he'd be a 220 lb Heavyweight fighting like Vasily... if Vasily punched with Ike Williams power. Not unfeasible... but demanding a lot of license.

Looking at Louis' frame, I don't think it's unfair to assume he could comfortably pack 20 pounds on his frame w/ no ill-effect against larger Hw's. Even without HGH and other PEDs. He didn't need that extra size to soundly defeat the Baers and Carneras of his era. In fact, he kept it off as it would've cost him against movers like Conn.
Now, guaranteed to face only giants unable to evade his robotic footwork, a 230 pound Louis wouldn't lose his edge in hand speed, and probably have an improved chin. Again, that's by bulking up naturally.

Fury will always give him problems because Fury's a crafty out-fighter w/ a granite chin. Just a terrible style match-up for a guy who liked his opponents front and center.

[them_apples]

Right. One of my earliest Boxing memories is of the news replaying Duran's KO of barkley. He also nearly foiled hagler - a much more complete fighter than Marciano?

Who is to say Duran can't KO Marciano? They're about the same height and have about the same reach.



Foreman got out-boxed by Ali and Young. But some how he magically assumes these powers where he can beat Fury?!!?! I honestly wonder if you've ever seen a Foreman fight. At least anything beyond the Frazier and Moorer fights.



Fury made a tactical mistake coming forward. A 215 lb. man caught him off-balance.

We get it. It's your Crusade to let everyone know that as a result of changes in rules, diet, training and medicine fighters enter the ring at much heavier weights than they would have in previous generations. A contemporary fighter with a smaller frame than a fighter of an earlier era might way (much) heavier. on fight night. No one is disputing that. The details are a little more nuanced (bulk-up, then cut-down means that a lot of today's fighters are also sneaking into divisions they're too big for). But we all agree.

None of that changes physics of course. You can't prove what Cunningham might have weighed in the 70's. At best you can make a good guess. But you just don't know. And, really, it doesn't matter. Not one bit. Because what we do know is that a 215 lb. man caught Fury w/ a power punch. The laws of physics are real. They are provable.

I've never one seen a physics problem that preficed "now this moving object would have been lighter in the 1970s because training methods were different..." I know a lot of engineers, should i poll them and ask if they give two ****s about irrelevant details like that?

theres a lot more to it than "physics". or at least how you are refferring to it. Fury is huge but can't bust a grape. He's not particularly strong for his size, nor does he have great technique / leverage.

Yeah foreman got outboxed by Ali. In what world do you think fury has the boxing skills of Ali? or the mentality, even on cocaine to pull off what ali did. I get it to someone who has never boxed Fury slapping a guy like Wilder around looks impressive, but Wilder actually has 0 boxing ability what soever.

Foreman had twice the skill of Wilder, you just have to know what to look for.

I could write a book on this but I don't have the time, but the skill gap is astronomical as is the mental game.

Ali would have knocked both Wilder and Fury out, they wouldn't even be ranked in 1970.

[Rusty Tromboni]

theres a lot more to it than "physics". or at least how you are refferring to it. Fury is huge but can't bust a grape. He's not particularly strong for his size, nor does he have great technique / leverage.

Yeah foreman got outboxed by Ali. In what world do you think fury has the boxing skills of Ali? or the mentality, even on cocaine to pull off what ali did. I get it to someone who has never boxed Fury slapping a guy like Wilder around looks impressive, but Wilder actually has 0 boxing ability what soever.

Foreman had twice the skill of Wilder, you just have to know what to look for.

I could write a book on this but I don't have the time, but the skill gap is astronomical as is the mental game.

Ali would have knocked both Wilder and Fury out, they wouldn't even be ranked in 1970.

Hahahaha! This is about as bad a case of "run and hide" as I have seen here.

So, let's get this straight: before it was just that fighters today come in too paunchy; and really aren't as naturally large as fighters from previous eras, who entered the ring extra lean. Before that bubble was burst, that was the excuse for why Fury couldn't withstand the fire-power of the mythical figures of yesteryear.

Now, it has become: Ali had the "mentality" to win fights that today's proponents simply don't have. And it's all clear to someone who actually has this elusive knowledge. Between the pseudo-science and the mysticism you sound like a Snake Oil Salesman or a religious cult leader.

Claiming Ali is a better Boxer is clear to anyone who's Boxed was probably your worst ploy. That exposed you as a nerd who's never trained, probably you don't even sweat. I have been to some real legit Boxing gyms across the East Coast over the past few decades. If the didn't laugh you out of the gym, it would be because they shoved you in a locker. Sure, most folks in American gyms are going to say Ali is better than Fury. But no one is going to say that Ali is the better pure-boxer. Ali wasn't an out-fighter, and he didn't have Fury's defensive ability. Much of that was due to the gross advantage he had in speed and reflexes over his opponent. But Ali was no Willie Pep. Never. And while no one would say Fury is that level of defensive master, either, he's clearly a very sound defensive technician who sticks to the scripts. This isn't a high-level breakdown. it's conspicuous even to casual fans.

Even if you think Ali had an impressive mentality, that's not what beat Foreman. Foreman clearly struggled w/ anyone who couldn't be pinned in place. Even Gil Clancy couldn't save him. Years later, he leveled out. He got his mojo back. He learned to pace himself and control the fight. But his best win was what, Moorer? It was too little, too late. A great comeback, but one only possible in the Heavyweight division of that time. Basically, he became a poor man's version of Wilder.

Fury's got the mentality Ali had in spades. His comeback is the best we've ever seen in Boxing. His ability to peel himself off the mat in that final round, and then turn the tables on Wilder was epic. Just because it conflicts with your childish adulation of past fighters, and you lack the experience to appreciate doesn't mean it is not fact. Facts don't care about your feelings.


I am starting to pity you. If you can't effectively argue a point, step back for a minute and reassess. If you notice you've been proven wrong, just concede. There's nothing wrong with that. It's actually a secret of success. Do you think Jeff Bezos became a Billionaire the first day he put on a business suit? When you start making things up and say weird shytt, then people don't take you seriously. They could care less if you're wrong about something, but when you're wrong and try to defy logic to try and make yourself sound right, then they judge. Hard.

[them_apples]

Hahahaha! This is about as bad a case of "run and hide" as I have seen here.

So, let's get this straight: before it was just that fighters today come in too paunchy; and really aren't as naturally large as fighters from previous eras, who entered the ring extra lean. Before that bubble was burst, that was the excuse for why Fury couldn't withstand the fire-power of the mythical figures of yesteryear.

Now, it has become: Ali had the "mentality" to win fights that today's proponents simply don't have. And it's all clear to someone who actually has this elusive knowledge. Between the pseudo-science and the mysticism you sound like a Snake Oil Salesman or a religious cult leader.

Claiming Ali is a better Boxer is clear to anyone who's Boxed was probably your worst ploy. That exposed you as a nerd who's never trained, probably you don't even sweat. I have been to some real legit Boxing gyms across the East Coast over the past few decades. If the didn't laugh you out of the gym, it would be because they shoved you in a locker. Sure, most folks in American gyms are going to say Ali is better than Fury. But no one is going to say that Ali is the better pure-boxer. Ali wasn't an out-fighter, and he didn't have Fury's defensive ability. Much of that was due to the gross advantage he had in speed and reflexes over his opponent. But Ali was no Willie Pep. Never. And while no one would say Fury is that level of defensive master, either, he's clearly a very sound defensive technician who sticks to the scripts. This isn't a high-level breakdown. it's conspicuous even to casual fans.

Even if you think Ali had an impressive mentality, that's not what beat Foreman. Foreman clearly struggled w/ anyone who couldn't be pinned in place. Even Gil Clancy couldn't save him. Years later, he leveled out. He got his mojo back. He learned to pace himself and control the fight. But his best win was what, Moorer? It was too little, too late. A great comeback, but one only possible in the Heavyweight division of that time. Basically, he became a poor man's version of Wilder.

Fury's got the mentality Ali had in spades. His comeback is the best we've ever seen in Boxing. His ability to peel himself off the mat in that final round, and then turn the tables on Wilder was epic. Just because it conflicts with your childish adulation of past fighters, and you lack the experience to appreciate doesn't mean it is not fact. Facts don't care about your feelings.


I am starting to pity you. If you can't effectively argue a point, step back for a minute and reassess. If you notice you've been proven wrong, just concede. There's nothing wrong with that. It's actually a secret of success. Do you think Jeff Bezos became a Billionaire the first day he put on a business suit? When you start making things up and say weird shytt, then people don't take you seriously. They could care less if you're wrong about something, but when you're wrong and try to defy logic to try and make yourself sound right, then they judge. Hard.

half these things you are accusing me of I never said. Yes Fury is bigger then ali. but you were the one who was indirectly claiming he was on par with ali's boxing ability. how is this a run and hide statement?

as for a nerd whos never boxed, just add me on IG Jbathurst.tattoo I have my personal profile under there as well, I'd prob woop your ass.

[them_apples]

LOL, Tyson is the perfect example of why fighters bulk up.


Even if I concede that Tyson had: 1) a better chin; 2) a harder punch; 3) a nastier disposition than Floyd. Do you really think the physical differences between them were that much?

They weren't. Tyson and Floyd and 16/17 were probably nearly identical in physical traits. Again, you might give the edge to Tyson, but not by much. Certainly, Floyd had the headstart in Boxing training.

But Floyd showed up pre-Liston. Obviously there have always been huge Heavyweights. But Liston ushered in a new era. With Tyson, Cus learned from his mistakes and produced a far, far more robust fighter. I bet a lot came from steroids. I don't doubt that a bit. But steroids really only serve to enhance training. Tyson trained harder than stone to develop a very robust body. Sure, he had speed and endurance to exploit his size (dis)advantage against bigger men. But if he hadn't packed on the 30 pounds of muscle, he would've been bullied just like Patterson had. And a lot chinnier; which is terrible for the peek-abo style.

It was a genius move by D'Amato. It defied a lot of Boxing logic. But it worked great. Tyson was Patterson 2.0

completely wrong. Tyson was 190 lbs at 15, what was Patterson? 145?. Same height sure but Tyson was a lot naturally stronger and muscled. I don't get your logic.

[Rusty Tromboni]

half these things you are accusing me of I never said. Yes Fury is bigger then ali. but you were the one who was indirectly claiming he was on par with ali's boxing ability. how is this a run and hide statement?

that's quitethe white flag.

so who was saying it? the other "them_apples"?

as for a nerd whos never boxed, just add me on IG Jbathurst.tattoo I have my personal profile under there as well, I'd prob lick your ass.

sure, lots of boxers have. i wrestled growing up, then switched to jujitsu. i've made my share of boxers squeal.

it'scute seing a canadian kid act sassy and impolite. but don't take yourself too seriously. i'll tell you what i tell kids i coach(real monsters, son): don't put your pride in front of your opportunity to grow. if you say something wrong, don't try to make it right. just learn and move on.