Originally posted by Dr. Z
View Post
Yes, the competition was, in similar fashion to many other eras, not a strong era... Neither was the era of Dempsey, Liston, Marciano, Klitsko, etc. As a matter of fact? there were few strong eras in the heavyweight division. So why single out Louis in this regard?
Don't be sorry... every style has strengths and weaknesses. Louis weakness summed up? He had one gear. I guess the fact that he got knocked out so much meant he carried his guard too low...oh wait! He didn't get Kayoed. His balance was perfect...I don't know where you are getting these so called flaws. Stick your face style? Really?
I disagree strongly... What puncher do you know, wins rounds consistently against excellent boxers? And then you proceed to explain away all Louis' wins. You have to understand that, especially in the days of a 15 round fight, the puncher's game was a numbers game... A slice of quantum probability! Louis, like all punchers was trained to know, that if he methodically stalked an opponent, he would get a certain amount of opportunities. His training was to utilize those opportunities and not let his man off the hook. So, for exmple, with Conn, when he got his opportunity, he utilized it.
Wilder is a puncher, regardless of his "skill" level... He is an example of a puncher to the extreme. He was a great example of what I am trying to get you to understand: He fought Ortiz, who is skilled, and waited for his opportunity. It never mattered the rounds he lost.
When you say "regarding Wlad and Lewis" you have to differentiate between the two. To me Lewis fought excellent competition, Wlad fought horrible competition. With that said I believe Wlad is comparable to Louis in terms of competition fought. Lewis fought excellent competition and should not be compared IMO.
Comment