Dream fight upsets

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Apr 2007, 10:54

There are certain fighters who rarely get picked against in mythical match ups.

I'm interested in guys generally rated well below the greats mentioned here who you would pick to win.

Ali

Who are the potential Ken Nortons out there?

I think 2 types of fighter spring to mind: swarmers and defensive minded fighters.

The left hook seems so important in beating Ali. Considering the blue print of Frazier I'd have to go with Jack Dempsey having a great chance at beating Ali. The other fighter who reallys stands out as having the tools and style is Jersey Joe Walcott.

Louis

Louis would seem to be vulnerable to great punchers who were also great finishers and a skilled mover could also give him plenty of trouble.

Of the latter category I'd fancy Tunney as a very tricky match up for Louis. If Joe had met Ezzard Charles in his prime he'd have been the favourite but could Charles have boxed his way to a decision?

Whilst Joe got up to wreak havoc on the not so great fighters who floored him could he have done the same thing if he'd have been dropped by a Foreman or Liston? A great finisher like Dempsey might once again have a great chance of an upset here. Tyson was also a great finisher and could get the job done early if he managed to drop and shake Louis up. Demspey and Tyson are a dman sight better than Tony Galento or Jimmy Braddock when it comes to finishing an opponent (and almost everything else too for that matter)...

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 20 Apr 2007, 11:45

Ezzard wrote:There are certain fighters who rarely get picked against in mythical match ups.

I'm interested in guys generally rated well below the greats mentioned here who you would pick to win.

Ali

Who are the potential Ken Nortons out there?

I think 2 types of fighter spring to mind: swarmers and defensive minded fighters.

The left hook seems so important in beating Ali. Considering the blue print of Frazier I'd have to go with Jack Dempsey having a great chance at beating Ali. The other fighter who reallys stands out as having the tools and style is Jersey Joe Walcott.

Louis

Louis would seem to be vulnerable to great punchers who were also great finishers and a skilled mover could also give him plenty of trouble.

Of the latter category I'd fancy Tunney as a very tricky match up for Louis. If Joe had met Ezzard Charles in his prime he'd have been the favourite but could Charles have boxed his way to a decision?

Whilst Joe got up to wreak havoc on the not so great fighters who floored him could he have done the same thing if he'd have been dropped by a Foreman or Liston? A great finisher like Dempsey might once again have a great chance of an upset here. Tyson was also a great finisher and could get the job done early if he managed to drop and shake Louis up. Demspey and Tyson are a dman sight better than Tony Galento or Jimmy Braddock when it comes to finishing an opponent (and almost everything else too for that matter)...

I wouldn't say Louis was particularly vulnerable to great punchers. He got dropped as much as he did b/c he was an offense minded fighter who would let loose combinations with both hands, and while you are in the middle of a two-fisted attack you are vulnerable to a sharp counter-punch to put you off balance. But besides the Marciano fights, when did Louis not get RIGHT back up and start kicking ass (or in the Walcott fights at least come up with his head perfectly cleared)? Even vs Schmeling after getting badly hurt in the 4th he rallied back to win a number of the middle rounds and took an incredibly large number of flush right hands before the final KO.

Tyson and Foreman themselves would be coming into the danger zone big time if they tried to trade directly with Louis. Louis had the faster hands, better timing, better punch-placement, much better counter-puncher. Joe might go down but over the long haul no way foes Foreman not get decapitated. Tyson isn't even in Louis's league to be honest.

I give Liston a fair shot b/c he wore guys down with his heavy jab before going in for the kill. But I give a prime Liston a shot vs anybody.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 20 Apr 2007, 12:12

How about Joe Louis vs Jimmy Young. If the Louis who fought Conn (1st fight) fought the Young who fought Lyle and Foreman?

I think Young may have given Joe some problems?

Or you maybe of the school of thought that The Brown Bombers short fast hooks would not have been as easy to avoid as Foremans and Lyles more wide swings?

But if Conn almost beat Louis, why not a peak Jimmy Young?

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 20 Apr 2007, 14:56

Perhaps, but Young was able to avoid Foreman's more telegraphed shots and he was facing an older, very out of shape Ali (and still didn't do as much offensively as he should have). Conn was slick like Young but also much more aggressive and thus able to win more rounds. Even if Joe has an off night (like in the first Godoy bout) I don't see Young doing enough vs Louis to give him a chance at a decision.

One main reason why I feel like Louis was so tough to beat is b/c he was the fastest, hardest counter-puncher ever in HW boxing history (alonside Jack Johnson). Opponents were so wary of doing anything b/c he was SO quick with those counter rights and hooks, you wouldn't know what hit you. And he had the patience to wait and stalk while you were thinking of what to do next, piling up some points with his jab along the way.

A light-hitting counter-puncher like Young eats up free-wheeling aggressors like Foreman, Lyle, Tua, Sam Peter etc. who come in no matter what b/c they believe in their knockout power, and often forget when to keep a distance.

That's one reason why, as much as it pains me to say it, Wladimir Klitschko beats Jimmy Young as well. While being a big puncher, Wlad is content and actually prefers to simply stay on the outside, using his reach and jab to pile up points and eventually set up his long straight right. Young was able to befuddle Foreman and Lyle b/c they were big tall guys who both bore in close vs opponents they had little respect for, especially vs a light hitter like Young. But while they were getting close, Young was able to bend and duck and find the distance for his counter-shots.

But on the other hand, Foreman and Lyle both annihilate Klitschko.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 20 Apr 2007, 16:06

The huge punching Ernie Shavers might pull off an upset against the oft knocked down Joe Louis. Ditto Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Joe Frazier.
I cant see any of the lesser lights beating the peak Ali.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 20 Apr 2007, 16:46

dr_devious wrote:The huge punching Ernie Shavers might pull off an upset against the oft knocked down Joe Louis. Ditto Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Joe Frazier.
I cant see any of the lesser lights beating the peak Ali.

The huge punching Max Baer, Tony Galento, Buddy Baer didn't give Joe Louis with any problems at all. I can't see a focused Louis getting into trouble agasint Shavers. I much rather would expect Shavers getting hurt by Louis early on.

If anything Louis didn't like counterpunchers (Schmeling, Conn, Walcott). Jack Johnson or Gene Tunney might have been unpleasant opponents for Joe L, and of course Muhammad Ali.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 20 Apr 2007, 16:55

pundit wrote:
dr_devious wrote:The huge punching Ernie Shavers might pull off an upset against the oft knocked down Joe Louis. Ditto Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Joe Frazier.
I cant see any of the lesser lights beating the peak Ali.
The huge punching Max Baer, Tony Galento, Buddy Baer didn't give Joe Louis with any problems at all. I can't see a focused Louis getting into trouble agasint Shavers. I much rather would expect Shavers getting hurt by Louis early on.

If anything Louis didn't like counterpunchers (Schmeling, Conn, Walcott). Jack Johnson or Gene Tunney might have been unpleasant opponents for Joe L, and of course Muhammad Ali.

I agree . . I think Johnson and Tunney produce much greater issues for Louis than Foreman, Tyson, Shavers etc.

I think in a two fight series, Louis knocks Ali out in the first fight, and Ali wins a hard fought split decision in the rematch. Both give each other major problems from a style perspective.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 20 Apr 2007, 17:15

I don't think Ali was particularly bothered by swarmers... who didn't he fight that didn't come after him? You can point at him having trouble with Chuvalo and Frazier... whom he both beat twice... but you could also point to him beating swarmers in Liston and Foreman and Bonavena and whoever else... you could probably count in one hand the number of fighters who weren't the aggressors in an important Ali fight...

I agree that the left hook is the best punch against Ali, but Dempsey never beats Ali... Walcott would have to get Ali out of shape...

To me Lennox would probably give Ali the most problems.. though I'm not sure it would qualify as an upset if Ali lost to Lewis. I wouldn't favor Lennox in a series of fights, but in one fight Lewis could win. I think the Witherspoon who should have beaten Holmes might give Ali some trouble... could be tough...

I'm sure Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, prime Tyson, Lewis, maybe Holyfield would all have a shot at beating Louis... though, again, not sure that those qualify as upsets per se. I don't think Ezzard Charles could have beaten Louis in his prime. I don't see Tunney doing it, though it'd be a good fight. I think Louis would eat Shavers up... but I guess Shavers has a punchers chance with anybody.

I don't understand how anyone who has ever seen their fights could say Louis knocks out Ali.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 20 Apr 2007, 19:32

Ali met fighters who hit harder than Louis and couldn't stop him... and Louis had trouble with mobile fighters. If you want to tell me Louis wins a decisions it's certainly a possibility, but a knock out is asking for a bit much.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 00:03

Louis never faced a 6'3" Heavyweight as fast as Ali with Ali's chin... he's going to have difficulty landing more than one punch on Ali, he's going to have difficulty hurting Ali...

And going by that logic Ali... who likely hits around as hard as a Schmeling or a Walcott... throws better combinations than most of Louis' opponents, too...

iceman21287 · Post by **iceman21287** » 21 Apr 2007, 01:44

dempseyfire wrote:
pundit wrote:
dr_devious wrote:The huge punching Ernie Shavers might pull off an upset against the oft knocked down Joe Louis. Ditto Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Joe Frazier.
I cant see any of the lesser lights beating the peak Ali.
The huge punching Max Baer, Tony Galento, Buddy Baer didn't give Joe Louis with any problems at all. I can't see a focused Louis getting into trouble agasint Shavers. I much rather would expect Shavers getting hurt by Louis early on.

If anything Louis didn't like counterpunchers (Schmeling, Conn, Walcott). Jack Johnson or Gene Tunney might have been unpleasant opponents for Joe L, and of course Muhammad Ali.
I agree . . I think Johnson and Tunney produce much greater issues for Louis than Foreman, Tyson, Shavers etc.

I think in a two fight series, Louis knocks Ali out in the first fight, and Ali wins a hard fought split decision in the rematch. Both give each other major problems from a style perspective.

I would bet money on Tunney outpointing Louis. The way I see Tunney, he had the same skills as Conn, but was bigger, stronger, and could take a better punch. I can see Tunney pulling off what would be a minor upset.[/b]

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 02:28

Decagon wrote:
I Feel Fine wrote:And going by that logic Ali... who likely hits around as hard as a Schmeling or a Walcott... throws better combinations than most of Louis' opponents, too...
**Winces**

lol wince away... I think Schmeling is a given, and while I think Walcott probably hits harder, the difference isn't great...

Have you abandoned your argument about Louis not being able to knock out a bigger, more mobile fighter? You passed over that part... and the rest of the post, for that matter.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 03:35

When did Louis suddenly become Sugar Ray Robinson... Louis was a great combination puncher, maybe the best in Heavyweight history, but he couldn't hit any mobile fighter he ever fought with that sort of ease. He had a hell of a time getting to Conn or Walcott, neither of whom had Ali's size or chin or leg speed. Louis would not hit Ali with more than one punch at a time.

If Patterson was anything he was closer to Louis in the combinations department than most any Heavyweight ever was, even if he didn't have Louis' power, he never hit Ali with more than one punch at time... and he had faster hands than Joe.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 21 Apr 2007, 07:38

I Feel Fine wrote:... and Louis had trouble with mobile fighters.

Here we go with that myth again. Besides Conn, care to provide some other examples of "mobile fighters" who gave a prime Louis trouble?

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 14:06

I already said previously that I agree that Louis is probably the greatest combination puncher in Heavyweight history, but are you denying that Floyd Patterson was a great combination puncher? How many Heavyweight champions, besides Louis, were better combination punchers than Patterson? On the one hand you're comparing Muhammad Ali, probably the fastest Heavyweight champion in boxing history, to the type of Joe Louis opponents who Louis had combination festivals on... saying that Louis would somehow land 5-6 punch combinations on Ali because he did it to his other opponents... the slow Baer's, the shot Sharkey's, the Buddy Baer's, the Abe Simon's ... and yet you're telling me I can't compare Louis to a legitimately great combination puncher, maybe top 2-4 all time in Heavyweight championship history, who rarely hit Ali with more than one punch at a time? Comparing an all time great Heavyweight combination puncher to the best combination puncher in Heavyweight history, or comparing relatively slow legged fighters to the fastest all time Heavyweight.. which comparison is more crazy?

John L... Louis wasn't in his prime but I would say Louis had difficulty with Walcott's movement. Like Ali, Louis fought few great mobile fighters, but Louis did have difficulty with those he fought, and neither of them had Ali's leg speed... fair enough?

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 21 Apr 2007, 14:29

I Feel Fine wrote:I already said previously that I agree that Louis is probably the greatest combination puncher in Heavyweight history, but are you denying that Floyd Patterson was a great combination puncher? How many Heavyweight champions, besides Louis, were better combination punchers than Patterson? On the one hand you're comparing Muhammad Ali, probably the fastest Heavyweight champion in boxing history, to the type of Joe Louis opponents who Louis had combination festivals on... saying that Louis would somehow land 5-6 punch combinations on Ali because he did it to his other opponents... the slow Baer's, the shot Sharkey's, the Buddy Baer's, the Abe Simon's ... and yet you're telling me I can't compare Louis to a legitimately great combination puncher, maybe top 2-4 all time in Heavyweight championship history, who rarely hit Ali with more than one punch at a time? Comparing an all time great Heavyweight combination puncher to the best combination puncher in Heavyweight history, or comparing relatively slow legged fighters to the fastest all time Heavyweight.. which comparison is more crazy?

John L... Louis wasn't in his prime but I would say Louis had difficulty with Walcott's movement. Like Ali, Louis fought few great mobile fighters, but Louis did have difficulty with those he fought, and neither of them had Ali's leg speed... fair enough?

Walcott beat Louis via counter-punching and giving slippery angles, not dancing . . .the rounds he danced he generally lost due to inactivity.

Louis and Patterson yes both fire quick combinations. Do does Evander Holyfield . . .doesn't mean those 3 fighters are similar from a style perspective at all. Joe and Floyd were completely different.

First off, to say Ali hit as hard as Schmeling is so out of whack it almost negates the rest of your argument.

2ndly, as I stated before, Louis was a master counter-puncher . . he wouldn't be following Ali around for 15 rounds a la Chuvalo. He would force Ali to lead. And Ali could be countered as he showed vs Norton 3 times, Young, and Doug Jones. Vs Louis, he not only would be facing a much faster and sharper puncher than he's ever faced, but also someone who had the patience to let Ali lead.

I see Ali getting caught with something big in the middle-late rounds, and then once he's stunned, he won't be able to hold on and jive like he did vs Frazier in the 11th or Henry Cooper (where he was saved by the bell) . . .the follow up combinations by Louis will be like nothing Ali ever had to contend with. It's the combination punching plus his many other attributes.

Hell, Herbie Hide was a extremely fast, very impressive combination puncher . . . no-one's putting him in this conversation. Just like you can't compare Floyd Patterson to Joe Louis . .apples and oranges. One was a very good, fringe great fighter. THe other one of the best who ever laced them up.

Friedie · Post by **Friedie** » 21 Apr 2007, 16:12

dempseyfire wrote: Walcott beat Louis via counter-punching and giving slippery angles, not dancing

Yes that's right...and Max Schmeling wasn't moving much either when he beat Louis. I think by "standing his ground" his right hand was much harder than if he would have danced circles around Joe.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 21 Apr 2007, 16:30

Friedie wrote:
dempseyfire wrote: Walcott beat Louis via counter-punching and giving slippery angles, not dancing
Yes that's right...and Max Schmeling wasn't moving much either when he beat Louis. I think by "standing his ground" his right hand was much harder than if he would have danced circles around Joe.

So did the main person in this comparison Billy Conn. People remember COnn dancing around in the opening rounds (which he lost) . . .when Conn did pull away from Louis scoring wise in the fight (but the fight was always close) Conn was standing in the pocket, firing combinations, and then side-stepping. He used boxing skill but was not dancing and 'stingin' like Ali did. In fact, no opponent EVER won rounds vs Louis by dancing and an overabundance of lateral movement.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 17:06

Dempsey... I disagree on almost every count.

I don't see anything out of whack about saying Schmeling and Ali probably hit about as hard as each other. Schmeling had to hit Louis... and a young Louis, at that... with a lot of well placed shots on the chin to knock him out... he didn't knock out Sharkey... and he was a lot smaller than Ali, he weighed like 15-20 pounds less. You're telling me Ali at his best couldn't knock out a 22-23 year old Louis with a lot of right hands on the chin over the course of 12 rounds, or that Ali couldn't knock out Young Stribbling in a 15 rounder... I'd admit that I haven't seen as many Schmeling fights as I've seen Ali fights, but I've seen maybe six or seven of Schmeling's bigger fights and he didn't strike me as a monster puncher, though certainly a very good puncher. To me he was able to knock people out by landing well placed right hands on the chin that opponents didn't see coming... who does that remind you of...

Now, for the rest of your argument... I have a lot of problems with what you're saying. First of all, I love the examples you use. I would never use Max Schmeling beating Louis as an example of Louis being some sort of weak chinned, easily out boxed fighter... because Louis was still a young fighter and to my understanding he didn't take Schmeling that seriously.. not saying he was out of shape, but my understanding is that Louis underestimated Schmeling the first time. I would also never use Ezzard Charles beating Louis as a way to hurt Louis, because again, Louis was older and I do not believe that it is a definitive fight... I believe Louis at his best would probably knock Charles out.

You on the other hand are using the typical examples people use when they want to attack Ali. Use the fights he had before his best, use the fights he had after his best. Don't talk about Ali from 64-75 which most people would acknowledge are Ali's best years... talk about 1963 and talk about 1976. Talk about Cassius Clay at 21 who out boxed Doug Jones for 6 rounds before he got tired and started to struggle. Talk about Clay versus Cooper where Clay got nailed with a bomb and was hurt... ignoring all the great left hooks a more mature Ali took in his later years without getting stunned. Talk about Muhammad Ali at 34, which was relatively old for a fighter then, at 235 pounds, the heaviest of his career to that point, in a post-Manila fight struggling to find Jimmy Young... I notice its fair to compare Young to Louis, but not Patterson, eh? I wonder why... or Norton III which was also a post-Manila fight, though to be fair Ali was in much better shape.

So if you want to talk to me about using bad comparisons, don't talk to me about what Ali at 21 or at 34 did in fights where he was still young for a fighter, or old for a fighter, and sometimes in less than great shape. If you want to tell me that Joe Louis ath is best beats Cassius Clay at 21 I will not only agree with you, but I will pick Louis by knock out. If you want to tell me that Ali at 34 would lose to Louis I will agree with you, and maybe a knock out might not even be out of the question. But if you're going to say that Ali in his prime loses to Louis because Ali was stunned by a big punch when he 21 years old and had 18 fights then I'm going to use fights like Louis-Charles to make my point, which would be equally unfair. I could just as easily say ridiculous things like "Charles had fast hands and he won 10 rounds against Louis so therefore Ali would." Louis at his best would knock Charles out, and Ali at his best would beat Jones or Young with less difficulty and would not get as badly hurt as he did against Cooper. I think that's fair to say.

Also, you're talking about counter punchers. Floyd Patterson was not a counter puncher? Yes, he was. The difference was he was fighting Ali when he was maturing as a fighter and was closer to his prime...

I did not say or claim that Patterson was on Louis' level or that he fought like Louis, so lets put that strawman to rest... I said the opposite. What I said was that if you want to talk about the effectiveness of using combinations against Ali, if you want to talk about hte likelihood of Ali being easy to hit with 5-6 punch combinations, then Patterson can be used as an example of a great, top 2-4 all time Heavyweight combination puncher who wasn't able to land more than one punch at a time on Ali. I said nothing of Patterson's other attributes, other than his handspeed which would allow him to get to the target faster, I spoke only of his abilities as a combination puncher. This is also a much fairer comparison than comparing Ali to Buddy Baer or one of Louis' other opponents who Louis used for target practice. Assuming that Louis would land 5-6 punch combinations with ease on Ali because he did it to less mobile, weaker chinned opponents is not good logic.

Now, then you're talking about Ali getting stunned and getting hit by follow up punches, which I think is your main point. The idea of course is that Frazier and Foreman and Shavers threw one punch at a time, and when they had Ali hurt they, again, threw one punch at a time at him and he was able to escape. Yes? Ok. First of all lets not make light of Frazier or Liston or Foreman as finishers... they were great finishers, they would not let their opponents off the hook, and they were patient. I would say Louis is probably the greatest finisher in Heavyweight history, maybe in boxing history, but if anyone is close to Louis in the finishing department, it is those men I named... they may not be as good as Louis in finishing an opponent, but they are accomplished finishers.

Now, Liston for example had Clay in trouble in the 3rd round and I guess you could use the 5th as an example... he did not throw one punch at a time, he went to the body, and though he was probably over-aggressive in the 5th round, he was patient in the 3rd round when he seemed to have Clay a bit stunned... but nothing happened, Clay survived the round. Clay was able to survive in his usual way of holding, moving, etc. No one Louis fought was as good at using these tactics as Ali was. Whether they would work or not, we'll never know, but it's not safe to assume that because Louis knocked the Baer brothers around that Ali would not find ways of escaping to me is a bit of wishful thinking.

I mentioned Liston... Norton also had Ali hurt a few times, I don't recall him ever getting impatient, he would go to the body and he would set up head shots. I mention these examples not becuase these men were great combination punchers, just to illustrate that Ali did have opponents who had him hurt and who did not throw simply one punch at a time like Frazier did. Frazier had Ali hurt badly in the 11th round of their first fight... the ring rust fight, as one might call it... and certainly if that had been Louis, Ali would have been in a lot more trouble, Louis might even knock Ali down in that round. But I don't think it takes too much optimism to assume that Ali would get up, and Ali was very good at recovering from big shots... he was fine in the 12th against Frazier and he had taken a lot in the 11th. And the 11th round of the 1st Frazier fight is the worst case scenario, its very optimistic to assume that Louis would hurt Ali that badly, and Ali was very easy to hit in the middle and late rounds of that first Frazier fight, for reasons I already alluded to...

I could also turn this around and say that if Ali kncoks Louis down that Ali too will throw more combinations at Louis than Walcott or Braddock or other fighters did, and perhaps Louis might be in trouble. After all, Ali was knocked down once in three Frazier fights, Louis three times in two Walcott fights... and yet Ali is the one we should worry about when it comes to who will knock out whom? And again, I emphasize that I think Walcott is a bigger puncher than Ali, I just don't know that the difference is so great that if Ali hit someone square and had something behind the punch that he would have so much less of an impact on the fighter than Walcott would.. also taking into acount that Ali was the bigger man and generally fought bigger fighters than Walcott did. People also talk about Ali's knock downs, he was kncoked down 4 times in his career... twice as a young fighter, once in possibly the greatest fight of all time from a perfect punch, and once when someone stepped on his foot... Louis on the other hand was knocked down I think 9 times in his career... so how do you so confidently assume that Louis would not be rocked in these fights? I think Louis had a very good chin, but if you hit him with something he didn't see coming he could be hurt... you're saying Ali could not catch him with something he didn't see coming?

As for Walcott... my point was that Walcott was moving, he wasn't walking to Louis trying to fight Louis toe to toe like many other Louis opponents, he was back peddaling and using counter punches... that's a lot closer to what Ali would do against Louis than what Jim Braddock or Johnny Paycheck would. And Ali would of course have four inch reach advantage on Louis and a one inch height advantage, unlike Walcott who according to boxrec was shorter than Louis and had a smaller reach... that would certainly help Ali fight Louis on the outside...

And look, I'm not trying to be hostile with anyone here, though I'm not sure I could say the same of some of you. I think you're all good posters and I would not be as disagreeable with the idea of Louis getting a decision, though I wouldn't agree with it... but saying that Louis knocking Ali out is a likely outcome seems like a stretch to me, and it seems like its mostly coming from a biased way of looking at Ali's fights and performances... fact is Ali fought better fighters than Louis did, and Sonny Liston is probably closer to Louis than Walcott is to Ali... I don't think it would be an easy fight either way, and I don't think a knock out is likely either way...

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 17:11

dempseyfire wrote:
Friedie wrote:
dempseyfire wrote: Walcott beat Louis via counter-punching and giving slippery angles, not dancing
Yes that's right...and Max Schmeling wasn't moving much either when he beat Louis. I think by "standing his ground" his right hand was much harder than if he would have danced circles around Joe.

So did the main person in this comparison Billy Conn. People remember COnn dancing around in the opening rounds (which he lost) . . .when Conn did pull away from Louis scoring wise in the fight (but the fight was always close) Conn was standing in the pocket, firing combinations, and then side-stepping. He used boxing skill but was not dancing and 'stingin' like Ali did. In fact, no opponent EVER won rounds vs Louis by dancing and an overabundance of lateral movement.

No I agree, I think for the most part Conn was on the inside.

I also agree no opponent ever beat Louis that way... so what? Ali was unlike anyone Louis met. The point I was making about Walcott was that Walcott's movement and counter punching did trouble Louis, and that's about as close as any Louis opponent ever was to Ali.

Friedie · Post by **Friedie** » 21 Apr 2007, 17:46

I Feel Fine wrote: Louis was still a young fighter and to my understanding he didn't take Schmeling that seriously.. not saying he was out of shape, but my understanding is that Louis underestimated Schmeling the first time.

Louis was young...yes. But by the time he met Schmeling he already had knocked out Carnera, Baer and Uzcudun and was considered unbeatable.

Max Schmeling was ranked 2. in the Heavyweight division after beating Walter Neusel and Steve Hamas in 1934 and 1935. Louis was ranked 1. Champion Braddock wasn't taken very seriously that time, both Louis and Schmeling were considered better I guess. So the two best Heavyweights met at Yankeestadium. It was more Schmelings strategy, good counterpunching and "lack of fear" that decided the fight and less underestimating an opponent by Louis IMO.

If you watch the first 3 rounds you see that both fighters took the fight very seriously.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 21 Apr 2007, 18:30

I Feel Fine wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:
Friedie wrote: Yes that's right...and Max Schmeling wasn't moving much either when he beat Louis. I think by "standing his ground" his right hand was much harder than if he would have danced circles around Joe.

So did the main person in this comparison Billy Conn. People remember COnn dancing around in the opening rounds (which he lost) . . .when Conn did pull away from Louis scoring wise in the fight (but the fight was always close) Conn was standing in the pocket, firing combinations, and then side-stepping. He used boxing skill but was not dancing and 'stingin' like Ali did. In fact, no opponent EVER won rounds vs Louis by dancing and an overabundance of lateral movement.
No I agree, I think for the most part Conn was on the inside.

I also agree no opponent ever beat Louis that way... so what? Ali was unlike anyone Louis met. The point I was making about Walcott was that Walcott's movement and counter punching did trouble Louis, and that's about as close as any Louis opponent ever was to Ali.

I agree, can we at least say it's not a decisive outcome? I wouldn't rule out an Ali decision win but I don't think one can say a Louis KO outcome is impossible.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 18:59

Friedie wrote:
I Feel Fine wrote: Louis was still a young fighter and to my understanding he didn't take Schmeling that seriously.. not saying he was out of shape, but my understanding is that Louis underestimated Schmeling the first time.
Louis was young...yes. But by the time he met Schmeling he already had knocked out Carnera, Baer and Uzcudun and was considered unbeatable.

Max Schmeling was ranked 2. in the Heavyweight division after beating Walter Neusel and Steve Hamas in 1934 and 1935. Louis was ranked 1. Champion Braddock wasn't taken very seriously that time, both Louis and Schmeling were considered better I guess. So the two best Heavyweights met at Yankeestadium. It was more Schmelings strategy, good counterpunching and "lack of fear" that decided the fight and less underestimating an opponent by Louis IMO.

If you watch the first 3 rounds you see that both fighters took the fight very seriously.

Yeah, I knew about that. But my understanding was also that Louis felt this would be another ex-champion who he would eventually knock out. Either way, I think my underlining point was that Louis was not at his peak, and he showed only a couple of years later that was the better fighter. And yes, I remember the first three rounds specifically being rather hard fought...

Dempsey... I'm not saying its impossible, I don't think its impossible for any fighter to KO any fighter whose in the same weight... I just don't think its likely. But I can agree to disagree... I wasn't saying that you were crazy or didn't know what you were talking about, I was just saying that I personally don't see it happening... but its cool. I understand why you're picking Louis. Like I said earlier, I think it would be a tough fight either way.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 21 Apr 2007, 21:25

I Feel Fine wrote:John L... Louis wasn't in his prime but I would say Louis had difficulty with Walcott's movement. Like Ali, Louis fought few great mobile fighters, but Louis did have difficulty with those he fought, and neither of them had Ali's leg speed... fair enough?

Not really. Of course Louis, or any other fighter in history would have had trouble with Ali's foot spped. And his hand speed. What bothers me is how everyone always jumps in with "Louis had trouble with mobile fighters", when the reality is that besides Conn, he didn't have any real problems with any fighters while he was in his prime. He was far past it when he fought Walcott, as just about everyone recognizes that Louis lost a lot during the war years.

I'm not saying that Louis was perfect, but he certainly didn't have any more problems with quick fighters than any of the other ATG HWs. I am just amazed how many use that line without actually thinking about the facts of his career.

But thanks for the reply, it's much better than what I usually get, which goes something like -- if I have to tell you which ones then you don't know anything. And they never provide any names. because there aren''t any besides Conn.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 22:38

No, I agree Louis wasn't in his prime when he fought Walcott... I talked about this in that Marciano thread. But I wouldn't say he was shot either... kind of like Ali from 70-75... not shot, not in his prime. Like I said earlier, Louis only fought a handful of mobile fighters who didn't come after him. And I would also agree with what you said about Louis not having any more problems with quick fighters than anyone else.

Dream fight upsets

Dream fight upsets

Re: Dream fight upsets