BoxRec

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Jaywheel wrote:mugabi already told you why, fascism baby

Why did you say Mugabi?

I could swear I'd written keithmoonhangover. Lucky enough you guys are reading the previous posts made in a thread...

Eddie Futch picked Louis. So, I will say Louis too.

Jaywheel wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Jaywheel wrote:mugabi already told you why, fascism baby

Why did you say Mugabi?

I could swear I'd written keithmoonhangover. Lucky enough you guys are reading the previous posts made in a thread...

Child

Ali by decision.

Darling wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:Ali on points, though I do think Louis would drop him at least once. This would look like a battle between all time greats. Although I pick Ali, I'm sure Louis would give him all he could handle.

Louis is one of my favourite finishers.

I think if he got Ali in trouble, he could very well get him out of there.

Rating heavyweights peak vs peak, I think it's Ali & Louis, a fairly big gap, then the rest of the pack.

Ali never faced a puncher as accurate or a finisher as clinical as Joe Louis.

As great as Ali was, and he was truly great with massive skill and heart, Louis would have been a nightmare for him.

This is a tough one to call for me, because there's so many factors involved. I think Louis handspeed would have Ali on the move constantly but Ali's footspeed would often leave Louis out of position to throw leveraged shots. I think I'd lean on Ali by close points win, with both suffering knockdowns, Louis early by being shocked by Ali's speed and movement, and Ali late as he tires and Louis connects more solidly.

Would just kill to hear Blackburn's take on how to tackle Ali between rounds. Louis had the better cornerman.

If the great Billy Conn, who only weighed 167lbs in that fight and almost put the great Joe Louis down, what would a guy like the great Muhammad Ali, would do?

Too fast, too big and too strong. Ali all the way.

elmersalsa wrote:If the great Billy Conn, who only weighed 167lbs in that fight and almost put the great Joe Louis down, what would a guy like the great Muhammad Ali, would do?

Too fast, too big and too strong. Ali all the way.

Nonsense. Who won (Louis vs Conn) the fight in the end and how? Too big? Please!! Ali best weight was probably in or around the 220 mark. That would not be that much of a difference.

Too strong???? That is a weird statement. I would say the strongest of the two would have been Louis.

This fight is 50/50 for me.

BTW weren't you the one complaining that Ali always won on every possible scenario? And now you claim that that Ali would have an easy time against Louis. Weird!!!

elmersalsa wrote:If the great Billy Conn, who only weighed 167lbs in that fight and almost put the great Joe Louis down, what would a guy like the great Muhammad Ali, would do?

Too fast, too big and too strong. Ali all the way.

An all-too-common (& though relevant, all-too-overrated) analogy. The differences between Conn & Ali are actually, in truth, greater in number than are their similarities. I love the old school of thought among some Ali supporters in this fight that, "Ali = Bigger Conn," it's classic stuff, & shows what complete ignorance toward Conn some people have.

Like I say, I think there are some important relevancies to the analogy, I do, but fvck me, is it ever over-simplified & over-used.

You’ve got to scramble around and find reasons to tip the balance one way or another.

Louis did have trouble with movers. Billy Conn and Jersey Joe gave him his hardest fights during his championship reign. Ali was one of the best movers ever, was bigger and more durable than both of them too… Louis had that shuffling economical footwork. It would be hard for him, especially early on.

Joe also got KO’d by Schmeling thanks in no small part to a slide-rule right hand that was very accurate. Ali didn’t hit as hard as Max but he could find the shots when he needed them most and had just as accurate a right hand, with a longer reach as well… Louis did work on preventing being open to the right hand and he did close the door but it was never fully shut.

Ali had trouble defending the left hook. Frazier, Norton and even Cooper had a lot of success against him with the left hook. Louis had an under-rated left hook in my opinion. There wasn’t a punch Joe didn’t master. I wouldn’t give him a 10/10 (Dempsey/Frazier) but he easily gets and 8 or even a 9.

Also, Ali could not dance for the full 15 rounds. He’d have to hold his ground at some point. The pressure Louis would put him on would be immense and very draining. Joe’s economics would see him burn much less energy than Ali.

The other thing that bothers me is that pre-lay off Ali was stunned and dropped by some less than stellar opposition. Post lay-off he was more able to hold a shot, possibly because he was more set and moving less.

I imagine Ali starting brightly and building up a lead. Louis having his success in the middle rounds and pegging the scores back. Both men could come on late in a fight.

I’d plum for Ali but not with any conviction, probably if I’d have lived through Louis’s era I’d have gone for Joe.

Ezzard wrote:You’ve got to scramble around and find reasons to tip the balance one way or another.

Louis did have trouble with movers. Billy Conn and Jersey Joe gave him his hardest fights during his championship reign. Ali was one of the best movers ever, was bigger and more durable than both of them too… Louis had that shuffling economical footwork. It would be hard for him, especially early on.

Joe also got KO’d by Schmeling thanks in no small part to a slide-rule right hand that was very accurate. Ali didn’t hit as hard as Max but he could find the shots when he needed them most and had just as accurate a right hand, with a longer reach as well… Louis did work on preventing being open to the right hand and he did close the door but it was never fully shut.

Ali had trouble defending the left hook. Frazier, Norton and even Cooper had a lot of success against him with the left hook. Louis had an under-rated left hook in my opinion. There wasn’t a punch Joe didn’t master. I wouldn’t give him a 10/10 (Dempsey/Frazier) but he easily gets and 8 or even a 9.

Also, Ali could not dance for the full 15 rounds. He’d have to hold his ground at some point. The pressure Louis would put him on would be immense and very draining. Joe’s economics would see him burn much less energy than Ali.

The other thing that bothers me is that pre-lay off Ali was stunned and dropped by some less than stellar opposition. Post lay-off he was more able to hold a shot, possibly because he was more set and moving less.

I imagine Ali starting brightly and building up a lead. Louis having his success in the middle rounds and pegging the scores back. Both men could come on late in a fight.

I’d plum for Ali but not with any conviction, probably if I’d have lived through Louis’s era I’d have gone for Joe.

Pretty tough to be critical of that post.

Could have done without the pegging reference.

I'm quite confident Ali would win this. Two biggest reasons would be his jab (Louis never saw anything like it) and his amazing ability to withstand punishment (Frazier, Foreman, Shavers and Liston's free round of hitting him in the 1st fight)

Seamus wrote:Could have done without the pegging reference.

I'm quite confident Ali would win this. Two biggest reasons would be his jab (Louis never saw anything like it) and his amazing ability to withstand punishment (Frazier, Foreman, Shavers and Liston's free round of hitting him in the 1st fight)

If you believe he had that durability during the 60's, that is...

seattledirk wrote:Ali on points. Louis wouldn't have knocked him out and couldn't have outpointed Ali. Then there are 30 years difference in nutrition and evolution on Ali's side. Same reason why Lennox Lewis > Ali.

30 years of 'evolution' doesn't exist . . .evolution as a process takes many hundreds of years (usually more) for small results to even be noticieable.

As for nutrition . . .what was Ali and Lewis eating that Joe wasn't? If anything Ali was known for eating worse and getting more out of shape in between fights . .

I think in a 3 fight series they split 2 . . forced to pick I see Louis wearing him down over 15 more often than not. But Ali would build a sizable early lead in all 3 fights.

Idisagree wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:If the great Billy Conn, who only weighed 167lbs in that fight and almost put the great Joe Louis down, what would a guy like the great Muhammad Ali, would do?

Too fast, too big and too strong. Ali all the way.

Nonsense. Who won (Louis vs Conn) the fight in the end and how? Too big? Please!! Ali best weight was probably in or around the 220 mark. That would not be that much of a difference.

Too strong???? That is a weird statement. I would say the strongest of the two would have been Louis.

This fight is 50/50 for me.

BTW weren't you the one complaining that Ali always won on every possible scenario? And now you claim that that Ali would have an easy time against Louis. Weird!!!

210-215 was his best weight, the lighter the better for him against Joe because he is going to need his legs all night. Totally agree with it being a 50/50 fight.

Also, while you cannot make an entire case based on Louis' performance in his first bout with Conn, neither can you simply dismiss what actually occured in that fight as irrelevant. In an aggregate sense it does count against Louis in that it shows he did have noticeable problems with faster opponents, and that his chin was nowhere near a 10.

Louis could be dropped but I watched the Schmeling fight a few weeks ago and Max had to absolutely thrash Joe to keep him down.

Ali was one of the most durable fighters of all-time but the ref could have intervened in the first Frazier fight. There have been less justifiable stoppages in championship history.

Louis was one of the best finishers there ever was.

I think it’s just too close to call with any real conviction. There’s plenty of evidence on both sides.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Seamus wrote:Could have done without the pegging reference.

I'm quite confident Ali would win this. Two biggest reasons would be his jab (Louis never saw anything like it) and his amazing ability to withstand punishment (Frazier, Foreman, Shavers and Liston's free round of hitting him in the 1st fight)

If you believe he had that durability during the 60's, that is...

It's a bit of a mystery that one. Ali gets hurt, dropped and satggered by decent punchers early in his career but then absorbs Liston and Foreman's best shots. The guys who hit and hurt him were generally smaller men.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Seamus wrote:Could have done without the pegging reference.

I'm quite confident Ali would win this. Two biggest reasons would be his jab (Louis never saw anything like it) and his amazing ability to withstand punishment (Frazier, Foreman, Shavers and Liston's free round of hitting him in the 1st fight)

If you believe he had that durability during the 60's, that is...

I do. He was younger and had more stamina. Ali don't like He would be getting hit a lot less than he would if he was older. Ultimately, that is what this would be about. Ali would be hitting Louis a lot more than Louis would be hitting him.

Foreman hit a lot harder than Louis, was just as good of a finisher and could not come close to stopping a past his best Ali. Louis is not going to hit a prime Ali anywhere near that much. His chance of stopping Ali is slim. There is a better chance of Ali stopping Louis. The most likely result is Ali win by decision.

Ambling Alp wrote:Foreman hit a lot harder than Louis...

Really? Based on... Please feel free to finish this sentence.

Louis had a 75% KO ratio wheras Foreman had a 84% KO ratio.

The Great John L wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Foreman hit a lot harder than Louis...

Really? Based on... Please feel free to finish this sentence.

Based on everything that I have seen of the two.

I think Foreman had a little more strength (power) behind his punches. However, Louis was faster, more accurate, way more versatile on his offense than Foreman. Louis would do the same damage that Foreman would do if not more with his combination's. Foreman could hit harder, but he was not a better puncher than Louis in my opinion.

Idisagree wrote:I think Foreman had a little more strength (power) behind his punches. However, Louis was faster, more accurate, way more versatile on his offense than Foreman. Louis would do the same damage that Foreman would do if not more with his combination's. Foreman could hit harder, but he was not a better puncher than Louis in my opinion.

Very well put, Louis picture perfect technique could catch Ali with a short, compact punch that he didn't see coming.