Joe Louis's Top 5 Wins

[therealpugilist]

Which 5 wins, and in which order, do you consider to be the best of Joe Louis? And why?

my bad

had to edit...its out of order


4)Max Baer...had a great chin, was the size of a modern era heavy and louis made him a punching bag

1)Jersey Joe Walcott(man that 4-5 punch combo out of no where was awesome) great comeback of past prime champ to keep title...jesey joe was catching his stride as a top fighter too

2)Max Schmeling for historical significance...he beat that man like he slapped his girl friend and screwed his mom

3)billy conn 1 ...great comeback

5)primo carnera....he was a good fighter, a bit of a side show and backed by the mob....Louis beat this guys but and had him stumbling and running like he saw a ghost

[therealpugilist]

Interesting documentary, I will have to watch it.
Regarding Schmeling being a bum, he certainly wasn't at that time.
But in modern heavyweight, he wouldn't even be competive.

he had the skills but the physical strength edge would be a lot to overcome

[Ray Corso]

Do you mean "Terror" Gains in 1925 who carrer ended at 116-22-5 that Gains? Then went 22-0 before loosing to Daniels who he fought in 1928? That's when he went 22-0 in a 3 year period!

theboxingXpert you need to study up sonny and stop reading records as if that's the bible of boxing. The men back then had to fight often if they were fit or not or the promoters would stop using them. That was a different era when fighters fought adversity at all times. Fighting once a month was very real for some fit or not.It was a very different time and the fighters then were also dealing with the Great Depression something I'm sure you have no clue of!
referring men who fought as "bums" explains all I need to know about you, just another disrespectful punk who is a tough guy on the keyboard. Never been in a gym in his life or the word bum would rarely be used. Unless describing himself! Good luck in your new position as forum jackazz, elroid again! Good luck with this one gang...................
Ray

[TheBoxingXpert]

Do you mean "Terror" Gains in 1925 who carrer ended at 116-22-5 that Gains? Then went 22-0 before loosing to Daniels who he fought in 1928? That's when he went 22-0 in a 3 year period!

theboxingXpert you need to study up sonny and stop reading records as if that's the bible of boxing. The men back then had to fight often if they were fit or not or the promoters would stop using them. That was a different era when fighters fought adversity at all times. Fighting once a month was very real for some fit or not.It was a very different time and the fighters then were also dealing with the Great Depression something I'm sure you have no clue of!
referring men who fought as "bums" explains all I need to know about you, just another disrespectful punk who is a tough guy on the keyboard. Never been in a gym in his life or the word bum would rarely be used. Unless describing himself! Good luck in your new position as forum jackazz, elroid again! Good luck with this one gang...................
Ray

When I call them bums, I'm referring to their level in boxing, they're not literally bums.

But I care more about quality than quantity, so please tell me some good reasons for Gains being such an honourable guy to lose to.

[therealpugilist]

Here's something that's never mentioned when speaking of Joe Louis. He lost 4 full years of prime age because of WW2.
When evaluating a skill level it helps to have a wide variety of opponents but when you don't you actually need to know techniques and then add in desire and attitude! If you NEED to have opponents to make a judgement chances are your limited when it comes to knowledge of the sport.
Louis at 6'2" 200lbs would easily fight at 215-220 if projected to the 2000 era.
Back then heavyweights trained down to lighter weight because of the length of rounds and over all more activity.
If you watch Louis you can actually see boxing evolve as he matures!
He had Mr. Blackburn as his mentor and every trainer today is still using Mr. Blackburns techniques, at least the good ones do.

There were alot of fighters through the 30's into the 50's that were outstanding boxers in technique and conditioning. Benny Leonard was fantastic, Willie Pep remains one the greatest pure boxer who ever lived. Billy Conn and Tunney were outstanding boxers along with Louis.
Sugar Ray Robinson remains TBE and p4p King, no one comes close!
The reason Wlad and men like Fury are dominate today is because there are NO outstanding talents in the sport right now! Wilder is a game young man but his technique suffers, Fury has his size to help him but technique wise he's sloppy and has no right hand to speak of. Joe Louis had a weak era but wiped it clean but he had talent if you knew techniques you could see it on film. Wlad has a weak era also but he's a one/two stand tall and lean away and hold guy. Not much dimension and a shaky chin too!
Heres a few good fighters that I'm sure are not very well known who fought Louis;
Max Baer
Charley Retzloff
Max Schmeling
Bob Pastor
John Henry Lewis
Buddy Baer--(who was the big guy then 6'6" 240lbs)
Billy Conn
Lou Nova
past Louis prime were a few good ones also;
Joe Walcott
Ezzard Charles
Lee Savold
Jimmy Bivens

Back then records could be deceiving when you had newspaper decisions, traveling into an opponents turf and both were contenders. Different times brought about different circumstances. There was a "waiting order" for contenders and it often meant dropping a decision or two. Not throwing the fight just getting the short end if it went the distance.

The fact that anyone could think that Wlad has more technical ability or knowledge over Louis is a sad state of affairs for boxing fans!

Ray

good to see you are still around ray...over the years enjoyed discussing the game with you/

[Ray Corso]

A "bum" is a worthless effort! Someone who doesn't prepare and gives litytle to no effort it does NOT mean skill level.
If your talking to me you need to learn the boxing terminology not something you "think" is correct!
Read up on Gains and then you'll know! I can point you in the right direction but you can do your own home work.
Your from the generations that see losses and think its the end of the world.
I had an old friend named Ted Lowery who fought in the 50's and fought far beyond his best because thats what he was, a fighter. I think his record was 75-75-10 guys like you look at the numbers and say bum! He was far from a bum, he was over matched alot but he needed to earn for his family so he lost alot of fights.
He also fought Marciano twice and went the distance twice! Most at ringside thought he won the first fight. He was a veteran guy while Rocko had about 22 fights. No one went 20 rounds with Marciano on their feet!

Ali was a bum when he came ill prepared for Spinks, Tiger Ted Lowery was NEVER a bum!
Ray

[ShoulderRoll]

The reason Wlad and men like Fury are dominate today is because there are NO outstanding talents in the sport right now! Wilder is a game young man but his technique suffers, Fury has his size to help him but technique wise he's sloppy and has no right hand to speak of.

Hey Ray, I agree that Tyson Fury is very sloppy. But wouldn't you say that he is also kind of unique in heavyweight history?

I could be mistaken but I don't believe there has ever been someone so big who moves his feet, feints, and moves his head like he does. What's your take on that?

[juggernaut666]

How is Joe Louis one of the greatest of all time? He didn't beat any opponents that would go the distance against the guys I mentioned. Watch videos of him boxing, he had neither skill nor size enough to be competive today. Look at his fights against Walcott, it wasn't exactly what you would call skillfully impressive when compared to modern fights like Fury vs. Klitschko.

Louis is one of the greatest of all time because of achievements of defending titles the most and overall history. Being a great has nothing to do with head to head ,its defined by era. If it were head to head Louis would be in trouble with many fighters that proceeded him. Louis is severly over hyped and is not flawless but you cant say hes not an all time great. The talent pool was not all that great in his era but all sports advance in one form or other.

[MisterPullman]

Old era boxing fans will always favor "their time" over any recent ones. It's the way the sport is.

Sure there were great boxers back then in Louis's time.. but none would last very long with the modern heavyweights we have today. It's a damn fact athletes do get better overtime. Olympics prove it, world records, and other various sports. Not only do they get better but stronger and smarter too.

Wilder would likely beat every single person in Louis's time. lol


I don't give a **** what the butthurt old era fans are gonna say to me for it, but it's the truth. Get over it.

[juggernaut666]

Hey Ray, I agree that Tyson Fury is very sloppy. But wouldn't you say that he is also kind of unique in heavyweight history?

I could be mistaken but I don't believe there has ever been someone so big who moves his feet, feints, and moves his head like he does. What's your take on that?

Fury is the best mover over the 6'6 pound mark thats ever been. He isnt sloppy at all he lacks flush power for a big guy but hes all around solid and also switches up orthodox to southpaw style ,who at 6'9 ever did that? Max Baer in comparison was the best big guy in his era and was wild and sloppy yet CERTAIN guys on here put lable him as a GREAT talent The two are so vastly different one hits harder because he swings for the fences resembling some one whos had too many drinks with his hands down by his waste while slowly stalking you.The other is a mover whos very hard to hit and utilities his long 85 inch jab property so i think its a no brainer who would be harder to fight not just on skill but size .The Fury significance is hes the first ever tactical giant nearest to a 7 foot mark with actual skill making the Carneras /Baers and Valeuvs look obsolete . If he actually had direct power he would be that much better .


what most overlook is being over 6'5 usually makes for bad balance,thats why the Carneras of the day threw lunging awkward and mis proportioned shots with their right hand ,they didn't have the trainers or advancements to teach them balance or to fight like a tall fighter.This is why even modern guys like wilder is off balnce all the time,hes simply either not training to level off the shots with good weight distribution or hes just not capable of having good balnce at 6'7......



A few guys with who had/have excellent balance at 6'5 or above......

Biggs
Tucker
Lewis
Klitchkos
Joshua
Bowe
Fury