Joe Louis is sickly overrated

[UpInThisYo]

No. That is a myth, imo. Athletes today are more athletic, stronger and bigger, yes, but the skills themselves haven't improved by any means. I'd say the art of inside fighting has actually declined. Parrying is also not used as much. In

Watch the link in the OP. It is a FACT that skills has improved. If Joe Louis went to any modern boxing gym, they would be angry at him for being so stationary and getting hit all the time. His defense was terrible.

[brickcityboxing]

I've learned to except that some people try dksab,some people are here to troll,some guys are extremely biased it takes away from the little **** they do know, and a few guys actually know what they are talking about... I'm not really sure what category this post would fall under... Nonsense.

[B-Bomber]

I just posted so I'm going to assume you are talking to me. In which part of muy post I said "they sucked"? I never said that, I just stated facts. I did say that Willard and Carnera were bums, but you didn't post any videos of them. I'm sure you can find some, "anyone" can look good in "highlights videos".

If you read carefully what I'm saying is that they are limited by their size and that weight is a factor. He claim's "today's heavyweight division is bad" and that the 30's were a golden era but I repeat:



And I repeat this:


Joe Louis had great technique but what happens when he faces someone like Vitali and his punches don't have the same effect that they had with all those lightheavyweights and cruiserweights he faced? What happens when is actually someone like Vitali the one who's hitting him back in the chin? P4P Louis was a great boxer, but he would be really small in these day and era. And weight do matter, that's why we have 17 divisions.

And that's one of the reasons why more fighters moved up to HW: they didn't have much of a choice.

And weight does matter but not always in a positive way.

In the past fighters did not lift weights, prefering to mantain speed and stamina since they had to go more rounds.

Maybe it's the reflex of a society where appereance is far more important, but be as it may, if you put a 250lbs man looking like a body builder in a boxing ring the guy will get tired by just keeping his hands up for a couple of rounds.

More often then not modern HW though aren't even so chiseled, they are just out of shape. Think of Tyson Fury, Chisora, Leapai , Solis.

Also note that rules were different back then, referees had a different approach, gloves were smaller and boxing in general was much bigger in the U.S. , hence more fighters, more competition.

In any case Joe Louis proved to be able to beat taller guys with a longer reach, what we do not know is if current fighters could go 15 rounds, if they would be able to stand their own in a dog fight without a referee constantly stopping the action, if they could take a punch well wearing smaller gloves.

It is not true that all things made by humans naturally evolve, not sports, not countries, not athletes. Sometimes things get worse. It might very well be the case for boxing (HW boxing in particular).

[BigAlexSand]

You see, this is the problem with some of the users of this forum that put the "old timers" on a pedestal. The 30's and 40's were a golden era compared to this one? Hoy many fights have you seen of all this Hws to claim that? They are all edited, in black and white, terrible quality and is really hard to find some footage of most of those heavyweights but it was a "golden era". "Anybody who was ranked in the top 10 in that era was a great boxer compared to the boxers of today who most of them are bums". Yeah, right..

Then how come the 30's and 40's had tons of lighheavyweights who moved up in weight and manage to be ranked at heavyweight while in this era that kind of achievement is incredibly rare? There's only one answer, kid. It's harder to be a TOP 10 heavyweight today than it was in the 30's and 40's. Those are facts, it's not an opinion. There were more LHW (and middleweights) ranked at HW in the 30's and 40's than there has been in the last decade.


And weight do matter. That it's also a fact. That's the reason why we have 17 divisions. Weight is a big factor in fights and can overcome talent and technique, look at the Gamboa Vs Crawford fight. The bigger they are, the less relevant it becomes but it's still a factor and the difference in weight today compared to the 30's and 40's it's huge. It would be a big factor in a fight.

Also it's actually your argument the one that's flawed. If you think that just because bums like Willard and Carnera (who were considered freakshows in their era) lost to smaller men that means weight is not a factor then you are wrong. I mean if yor are comparing his skills with the skills of people like Wlad, Vitali, Lewis or Bowe then you know nothing about boxing. Also Ali didn't "destroy" Foreman, he took a beating in that fight until Foreman got tired and Foreman wasnt that much bigger than Ali. You should actually watch the fights you mention.

I said compared to now the 30's and 40's look like the Golden Era. The fact their is 17 weigh classes, is ridiculous and most agree. I have seen alot of old fights, Willard/Dempsey is a prime example of a smaller individual out performing the bigger opposition. Willard as unskilled as he was beat a skilled HOF in Johnson. Dempsey imposed his power to a man who was 5 inch height advantage and large weight advantage; and that type of beating hasn't been seen in resent times.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

And yet, still, who else has made 25 title defenses of a unified title in any division in the history of the sport? Louis still holds the record.

And eras? Opponents? Come on. Every era is a so-so era. The 1970s get a little too much glory. No one ever knows who can beat who unless they actually fight.

And besides, I don't consider James Braddock, Max Baer or Max Schmeling to be chumps either. Sure. Joe fought some bums, but he thrashed them all for the biggest prize in the game. Only Holmes and Klitschko have come close to his record but I see Wlad failing to get there as well.

The Brown Bomber was a one of a kind and would beat most heavyweights. Of course, that's just an opinion but I know he obliterated most guys he fought and in closing I say again, 25 successful defenses of an undisputed title.

[AntonTheMeh]

i don't think anyone would argue that his resume is great. it's decent, but a lot like floyd, a lot of his greatness is attributed to his boxing ability. the man was the greatest puncher of all time. he made decking somebody look like poetry.

[mikinoki]

Joe Louis...

He was the best for his time. He was a legend. I respect him a lot and this should in no way be seen as any kind of hate against him.

But people put this guy in their top 10 lists of best boxers ever... It's absurd. He had a very weak resume and I really can't imagine him even going half the distance against guys like Ali, Tyson, Foreman, Klitschko, Lewis, Holyfield, etc. etc. etc. etc..... It's just not realistic and he gave us no reason to believe otherwise.

I got nothing but love for Louis, he was the best in his time, but boxing has evolved. When Deontay Wilder beats Stiverne, even he will have a better resume than Louis and that's being realistic (except if Wilder loses, of course).

Give Louis the props he deserves, but don't go into some kind of nostalgic worship. He has proven nothing to make him enter the top lists of best boxers ever. You're harming his legacy by disappointing people when they research his resume with too high expectations.

Besides, look how stiff he is. If Walcott had such an easy time hitting him over and over again, he wouldn't last 1 round against Mike Tyson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uCpJ0bm6RI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcK2...buzx4M56HwrZdb

[JasonBoxing]

I just posted so I'm going to assume you are talking to me. In which part of muy post I said "they sucked"? I never said that, I just stated facts. I did say that Willard and Carnera were bums, but you didn't post any videos of them. I'm sure you can find some, "anyone" can look good in "highlights videos".

If you read carefully what I'm saying is that they are limited by their size and that weight is a factor. He claim's "today's heavyweight division is bad" and that the 30's were a golden era but I repeat:



And I repeat this:


Joe Louis had great technique but what happens when he faces someone like Vitali and his punches don't have the same effect that they had with all those lightheavyweights and cruiserweights he faced? What happens when is actually someone like Vitali the one who's hitting him back in the chin? P4P Louis was a great boxer, but he would be really small in these day and era. And weight do matter, that's why we have 17 divisions.

I think Joe Louis would do quite well against Vitali........Chris Byrd did well against him and made Vitali quit. Byrd wasn't getting 'destroyed' like insane Vitali fan boys will want you to believe....he was actually looking good in most of thos rounds. Ducking and causing confusion. Countering and hitting Vitali on the body. Vitali was a great fighter, but have become a tad overrated due to Lennox Lewis and what people thought of as a great showing against an ATG. Except Lennox was truely out of his prime and heading rapidly towards shot status.

In fact...........Lewis was probably at the same level as Roy Jones was against Tarver in that second fight.

[BigAlexSand]

This is just blasphemy. Almost as disrespectful as say Sugar Ray Robinson was overrated; both fought in 30's-50's

[young_robbed]

Watch the link in the OP. It is a FACT that skills has improved. If Joe Louis went to any modern boxing gym, they would be angry at him for being so stationary and getting hit all the time. His defense was terrible.

I've already seen both Walcott-Louis fights before, so no need to rewatch it... as far as the stationary thing, well that was Louis' style. it doesn't mean that he was crude or that he wasn't a good technical fighter. He just didn't waste his energy moving a lot. Defensively, yeah he was nothing special.

I disagree with the notion that skills have improved.. No way. And what you are saying is not backed up with "FACTS". Tell me, if skills have improved so much, why don't we see anybody as brilliant as Muhammad Ali @ HW, or SRR/SRL at welter, or Jose Napoles at welter, or Pernell Whitaker at lightweight, or Roy Jones Jr at middleweight, or Wilfredo Gomez at super bantam, or Willie Pep at featherweight?

I don't see any heavyweights/cruiserweights today that throw better combinations than Joe Louis, or any heavies with better accuracy or punching technique. The **** Louis would pull off at HW was amazing stuff, and you don't even realize it.