Tunney versus Louis who wins?

[Tom Cruise]

I always felt that Louis does badly in head to head matchups against different era's. A lot of people are too emotional when discussing this great fighter, you can just tell how much the idolism and adoration is affecting their judgement.

Though I agree Tunney is a bad match up for Louis, from the limited footage we've seen of Tunney, I disagree with this. He is criminally underrated in H2H match ups considering his pedigree. I feel that many point to his worst nights, and see his opponents best, when they imagine match ups involving Louis.

You see it in this thread people bringing up Schmelling (doesnt really fight like Tunney and also very early in his prime, plus avenged with brutal KO1), or Conn (a bad night vs a great fighter, which he ended by KO, then rematched and KO'd him again).

I think the issue is that many see his chance as 'just' a punchers chance, because he often let rounds slip by, but in reality he almost always found his mark, and he didnt need to find it often, or even hurt you that bad to start the end of the fight (if that makes sense). Suddenly that punchers chance turns into his opponent needing to be damn near perfect for 15 rounds, which gives a different perspective on many ATG matchups for Louis I feel.

[HOUDINI563]

Over ten rounds I’d pick Tunney. A 15 rounder my vote is for Louis to find him.

[BKM-]

Though I agree Tunney is a bad match up for Louis, from the limited footage we've seen of Tunney, I disagree with this. He is criminally underrated in H2H match ups considering his pedigree. I feel that many point to his worst nights, and see his opponents best, when they imagine match ups involving Louis.

You see it in this thread people bringing up Schmelling (doesnt really fight like Tunney and also very early in his prime, plus avenged with brutal KO1), or Conn (a bad night vs a great fighter, which he ended by KO, then rematched and KO'd him again).

I think the issue is that many see his chance as 'just' a punchers chance, because he often let rounds slip by, but in reality he almost always found his mark, and he didnt need to find it often, or even hurt you that bad to start the end of the fight (if that makes sense). Suddenly that punchers chance turns into his opponent needing to be damn near perfect for 15 rounds, which gives a different perspective on many ATG matchups for Louis I feel.

The whole thing with Louis with the arguments of "He always came through, eventually" and "He still ended up finding his mark"..These were all against limited opposition compared to the ATG heavyweights he's supposed to do the same thing to.

In H2H matchups against the best we've ever seen, Louis isn't gonna "eventually" find his mark against them. In those cases if he lets rounds slip and is taking a pounding due to slow starts, he's finished against an Ali, Liston, Holmes, Holyfield, Lewis etc. etc.

And to respond to the "only looking at his bad performances" arguments. Let me put it like this. It is not a coincidence that his biggest struggles were against the best opponents he faced, and he was at his most dominant against his weakest opponents.

And even then it's not always the same pattern because he was decked by terrible opponents and beaten by great fighters. The Conn, Schmeling1, Walcott fights are too damning.

I can already see that you felt offended and I'm gonna tell you what I always tell Louis fans. We're not criticizing him for showing weaknesses in his era, we're just being realistic by pointing them out because he's supposed to beat the best heavyweights we've seen, which he clearly would not have been capable of especially the quite a few guys with great movement.

Too vulnerable, too static, too limited. Great in his time, a joy to watch. But forget the H2H fantasies. That's the LAST thing that defines his greatness.

[HOUDINI563]

First of all.... fighting top opposition, having tough fights and coming out on top us a strong sign that said champion is an ATG. Further no tough bouts where you come out on top it would be very difficult to rank said fighter as an ATG.

Louis skill set alone puts him in a category by himself. The most highly skilled boxer puncher who ever lived at heavyweight.

[HOUDINI563]

Let’s pick Holmes. Larry was extremely vulnerable to a right hand. Louis had the most destructive straight right in boxing history. Holmes runs into that punch and he would would he get up? Maybe. Would he survive the five punch combo that follows. Probably not.

[BKM-]

Louis skill set alone puts him in a category by himself.

His skill set was great but his physical attributes gave him serious weaknesses. He wouldn't have the foot speed, chin and physical strength to be dominant H2H.

Let’s pick Holmes. Larry was extremely vulnerable to a right hand.

Yeah, I guess he had a lazy left hand which left him open to right hands. I'm sure Max Schmeling would have beaten down Larry round after round and brutally knocked him out.

Louis had the most destructive straight right in boxing history. Holmes runs into that punch and he would would he get up?

Holmes literally took the most destructive right hand in boxing history from Shavers, got up and won the fight by stoppage.


Come on bud, you're not serious are you? It's like you're doing a parody of a Louis fan who makes specific arguments that can be shot right back at Louis.

[Tom Cruise]

The whole thing with Louis with the arguments of "He always came through, eventually" and "He still ended up finding his mark"..These were all against limited opposition compared to the ATG heavyweights he's supposed to do the same thing to.

In H2H matchups against the best we've ever seen, Louis isn't gonna "eventually" find his mark against them. In those cases if he lets rounds slip and is taking a pounding due to slow starts, he's finished against an Ali, Liston, Holmes, Holyfield, Lewis etc. etc.

And to respond to the "only looking at his bad performances" arguments. Let me put it like this. It is not a coincidence that his biggest struggles were against the best opponents he faced, and he was at his most dominant against his weakest opponents.

And even then it's not always the same pattern because he was decked by terrible opponents and beaten by great fighters. The Conn, Schmeling1, Walcott fights are too damning.

I can already see that you felt offended and I'm gonna tell you what I always tell Louis fans. We're not criticizing him for showing weaknesses in his era, we're just being realistic by pointing them out because he's supposed to beat the best heavyweights we've seen, which he clearly would not have been capable of especially the quite a few guys with great movement.

Too vulnerable, too static, too limited. Great in his time, a joy to watch. But forget the H2H fantasies. That's the LAST thing that defines his greatness.

You don't need to bring the 'offended' stuff. Im not that kind of fan, though I realise that is normally how it is on B'scene.

Im not trying to say he beats everyone, or that he doesn't have stylistic weaknesses, hell i've literally just picked Tunney to beat him.

My question is, why do other HW's performances not get put through the same scrutiny? You mention Walcott, a HOF HW just entering his prime as a boxer, well the Walcott fight was pretty much the end of his career, barring his financially motivated come back. He went 1-1 with Walcott without the robbery in the first fight, and ended the second by devastating KO. Do we take marks off Lewis for struggling badly with Vitali Klitschko and fortunately coming through with a cut enforced win? We say Louis struggled with Conn, a fighter he likely overlooked and still KOd twice. Well Lewis got sparked by Hasim Rahman in a similar situation when he overlooked an opponent.

Holmes lost to his Billy Conn (LHW Champ stepping up to HW), twice, though I did score them to Holmes close. He also had wars with Tim Witherspoon and Ken Norton, barely survived vs Shavers.

Even Ali, my H2H GOAT, had bad nights. Some in his biggest nights vs the likes of Frazier, but also guys like Jimmy Young, Ken Norton, dropped badly by Henry Cooper a fight before he beat Liston. Beaten by a 7 fight novice in Leon Spinks etc

No doubt all of these have context and reasons for why they happened. Maybe they were too old or too young, maybe they overlooked their opponent. Maybe their opponent just came with it that night, like Buster Douglas did with Tyson. Seems to me, based on years of talking about this stuff online, that Louis is not allowed that context. Every fight he struggled in over his long long career is brought up in H2H match ups. Even if it ended in a KO win for Louis, or he avenged it brutally in a rematch (hint, this was normally the case).

[BKM-]

You don't need to bring the 'offended' stuff. Im not that kind of fan, though I realise that is normally how it is on B'scene.

Im not trying to say he beats everyone, or that he doesn't have stylistic weaknesses, hell i've literally just picked Tunney to beat him.

My question is, why do other HW's performances not get put through the same scrutiny? You mention Walcott, a HOF HW just entering his prime as a boxer, well the Walcott fight was pretty much the end of his career, barring his financially motivated come back. He went 1-1 with Walcott without the robbery in the first fight, and ended the second by devastating KO. Do we take marks off Lewis for struggling badly with Vitali Klitschko and fortunately coming through with a cut enforced win? We say Louis struggled with Conn, a fighter he likely overlooked and still KOd twice. Well Lewis got sparked by Hasim Rahman in a similar situation when he overlooked an opponent.

Holmes lost to his Billy Conn (LHW Champ stepping up to HW), twice, though I did score them to Holmes close. He also had wars with Tim Witherspoon and Ken Norton, barely survived vs Shavers.

Even Ali, my H2H GOAT, had bad nights. Some in his biggest nights vs the likes of Frazier, but also guys like Jimmy Young, Ken Norton, dropped badly by Henry Cooper a fight before he beat Liston. Beaten by a 7 fight novice in Leon Spinks etc

No doubt all of these have context and reasons for why they happened. Maybe they were too old or too young, maybe they overlooked their opponent. Maybe their opponent just came with it that night, like Buster Douglas did with Tyson. Seems to me, based on years of talking about this stuff online, that Louis is not allowed that context. Every fight he struggled in over his long long career is brought up in H2H match ups. Even if it ended in a KO win for Louis, or he avenged it brutally in a rematch (hint, this was normally the case).

You literally have it completely backwards though. Louis is always given the benefit of the doubt and is fully cleared of all the heavy scrutiny that other HW greats are always subjected to. Both in ability and quality of opposition.

Again, you got it completely the other way around. Atleast according to my observations of a decade and a half of online boxing discussions.

To answer your question, the difference is Louis' bad nights(there seemed to be many of them. I would say getting decked by a two ton novelty fighter is a bad night as well not to mention all the others who sent him to the canvas) were not issues where he got caught by a shot or underestimated his opponent. Louis was trying his best, yet was comprehensively outclassed in prolonged fights which displayed serious stylistic and physical limitations.

Cement feet and subpar chin simply aren't going to cut it in H2H matchups, respect for your legacy doesn't make you a better fighter. Cultural admiration and a fear of critiquing you, also won't make you a better fighter. The latter is what Louis benefitted from for many decades in fantasy matchups.

[HOUDINI563]

Your thoughts concerning Louis are really ass backwards.

You cannot compare Holmes to Louis regarding skill or power. Louis checks most all the boxes. Holmes was a great fighter and I watched his every bout live from Ibar Arrington to his second bout with Spinks. However he, and most other heavyweight champions, does not rate on the same scale as Louis in terms of boxing skill and power. True Boxing skill is much more than having a great jab.

You honestly compare Holmes getting hit with one blow from Shavers to the lethal offense that Louis brought into the ring? Completely incomparable. Shavers was a very limited heavyweight contender. Great power but very little else. Poor stamina, poor chin, no defense. I watched Earnie in his every televised bout and saw him train back in 76 several times.

You need to brush up on what makes a great fighter. No heavyweight fighter since Louis exhibits his skill set. Where you come to these ass backward conclusions is beyond me and you are in a very limited minority. You would be laughed at by any knowledgeable boxing historian. Many uneducated individuals think by being controversial they exhibit knowledge.

Get to know how to fight and what it means to be a great fighter. Bragging your knowledge comes from posting on line 15 years is nothing to brag about. You are way out in left field because of it.

[HOUDINI563]

https://*************/watch?v=Q35AZX...J&index=2&t=0s