BoxRec

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Joe was a fanastic fighter and I have him in the upper echelon of greats. His pre-championship days were awesome. He carved up the division in a similar fashion to Dempsey and Tyson. Unlike those two he also had a fantastic championship reign. I think a lot depends upon your age and who was champ when you were young because we always remember those times fondly.

Louis also did a lot to help race relations in the sport and he deserves a lot of credit for doing that. Today we might not consider it right for Joe to have to be so polite but having read a few biographies of the man it wasn't really an act. Joe was a great human being.

I rate Joe as one of the greatest HWs ever and have no problem with anyone ranking him number 1.

Lets not sit on the fence now!... ......Louis is going up and down like a rubber ball at the moment..... 8)

Sorry, but I can't put Joe down and don't want people to think that I don't rate him. My top 4 looks the same as your top 4 other than Holmes and Louis are reversed.

Joe's hands are heavy and quick but he wasn't so quick on his feet and could be dropped. I know i've had this debate before and its true that he always got up quickly and made his opponents pay... BUT being dropped by Liston or Foreman would be a bit different to being dropped by some of the emdiocre fighters Joe was floored by.

When I look at Ali i can't see him being stopped. I can't see anyone out speeding him so you've either got to be master boxer or a super human punching machine. With Johnson it's the same. he wasn't as durable as Ali but he was so hard to hit cleanly that he wasn't going to be stopped and he would be almost impossible to out box. Joe would struggle with a mover and I can see a number of guys giving him a lot of trouble.

wlvrne wrote:

silkov wrote:

The Great John L wrote: This could be discussed all day because it's simply opinion. But I grew up in the Ali era, and watched many of his fights including seeing him fight live and in person. I also consider him the best HW ever, but his resume doesn't really rank any better than Louis's. Let's see, Spinks, Wepner, Coopman, Evangalista, Lubbers, Dunn, Blin... certainly no bums in that list. Of course, Louis also fought some questionable ones as well, but there are a lot of "second tier" fighters on both Ali's and Holmes record.

How about Frazier, Liston, Bonavena, Patterson, young, Mildenburguer, Chuvalo, Quarry, Foreman, Lyle, Norton, Shavers?... all these fighters and quite a few others Ali fought would have given Louis a hard time and I think the quality of Alis opposition outweighes that of Louis by some way. Ali's opponents were generally bigger but also faster and more powerful than the best that Louis faced. Many of Louis opponents were little more than blown up light-heavyweights. I think the majority of boxing fans would agree that the heavyweights of the late 60s to early 80s were the most talented that have been seen in the division by some way.
Only opinions ofcourse but to just pick out the Blins and Dunns that Ali fought as an example of his opposition is a little silly I'd say.

.....and in this post, Silkov listed some of the tough opponents that ALi fought, but forgot to list his boy's Larry's tough opponents. I'd list: Shavers, Norton, Evangelista, Weaver, Mercer (who was tough but should have been able to beat an aging Holmes), and Snipes ( who Larry did not give a rematch to). The rest of Holmes opponents were, IMO, B-class heavy wts.

WHHHOOA! I've only got 10 fingers! but heres 'my boy' Holmes toughest opponents... Shavers, Norton, Weaver, Witherspoon, Berbick, Snipes, Cooney, Smith, Williams, Bey, Mike Spinks.... thats leaving out Holifield, Mccall and Mercer who Holmes fought when past 40. 8)

silkov, i agree ali's competetion was better than louis but defintely not holmes. holmes defended against just as many bums as louis.

Guys like scott le doux, lorenzo zanon, alfredo evangelista, ossie oscaio, lucien rodriguez, tex cobb, marvis frazier, scott frank, leroy jones, david bey, and even leon spinks. all those guys were basically journeyman.

would have liked to see holmes fight top conters or champions like greg page, pinklon thomas, tony tubbs, mike dokes, etc. rather than those guys. i mean when holmes fought witherspoon, u saw how much trouble he had with him, and weaver hurt holmes many times, so did bonecrusher have holmes in trouble not to mention norton, shaves, and snipes.

also louis domintaed his title defenses alot more than holmes did. holmes was nearely Kayoed a couple times and had trouble with many opponents and was suceptible to right hands.

no doubt joe louis would have boxed holmes, and landed his big right and eventually knock holmes out.


and if u want to question size, louis defended against a lot of big guys. but of course id rather see louis fight a skillfull 175 lb conn rather than a slow 230lb man, its about skill.

buddy baer 6'7 250lbs
abe simon 6'6 245 lb
tony galento 5'10 233lb
primo carnera 6'6 260lbs
max baer 6'3 210lbs

and when louis hit these guys they did funny things. even though louis was only 200lbs, he showed how hard he could hit. all these big guys louis dismantled easily. IMO joe louis was the hardest hitting heavyweight of all time, and these knockouts against these 5 big men can erase the critics who wonder if louis can knockout the big modern heavyweights.
u see that 360 baer did when louis hit him with a right hand in the rematch??? or how bout in the 2nd round when a louis left hook acutally lifted galento off the ground and on to his back in a half of second.

and i dont know why u see liston and foreman beating joe louis. IMO joe louis hit harder, and not only that but could box as well. he was a complete all around fighter that also had a lot of speed in his punches.

he was the most complete all around heavyweight who ever lived, he had KO power, speed, defense, decent chin, jab, boxing skills, heart, and toughness. thats why he is the greatest. and he dominated in his prime a lot more than holmes did whike facing just as good if not better competetion.

no way does louis ko holmes who had amazing recovery powers.larrys jab was awesome too.louis-holmes is a tough pick em fight.also bare in mind louis could be taken out as with max in their first fight.logic states in a head to head the likes of liston would have stood a great chance.does this mean they should be rated higher than louis?no.louis's record speaks for itself.

Ezzard wrote:

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Joe was a fanastic fighter and I have him in the upper echelon of greats. His pre-championship days were awesome. He carved up the division in a similar fashion to Dempsey and Tyson. Unlike those two he also had a fantastic championship reign. I think a lot depends upon your age and who was champ when you were young because we always remember those times fondly.

Louis also did a lot to help race relations in the sport and he deserves a lot of credit for doing that. Today we might not consider it right for Joe to have to be so polite but having read a few biographies of the man it wasn't really an act. Joe was a great human being.

I rate Joe as one of the greatest HWs ever and have no problem with anyone ranking him number 1.

Lets not sit on the fence now!... ......Louis is going up and down like a rubber ball at the moment..... 8)

Sorry, but I can't put Joe down and don't want people to think that I don't rate him. My top 4 looks the same as your top 4 other than Holmes and Louis are reversed.

Joe's hands are heavy and quick but he wasn't so quick on his feet and could be dropped. I know i've had this debate before and its true that he always got up quickly and made his opponents pay... BUT being dropped by Liston or Foreman would be a bit different to being dropped by some of the emdiocre fighters Joe was floored by.

When I look at Ali i can't see him being stopped. I can't see anyone out speeding him so you've either got to be master boxer or a super human punching machine. With Johnson it's the same. he wasn't as durable as Ali but he was so hard to hit cleanly that he wasn't going to be stopped and he would be almost impossible to out box. Joe would struggle with a mover and I can see a number of guys giving him a lot of trouble.

Why do you care what other people think? . I rate Louis, . ..I rate him 4th! .
Seriously though :x I don't see me rating Louis 4th as being an insult to Joe.
Its funny that people worry about 'insulting' the memory of Louis but noone worries about insulting Larry Holmes. I know he's a big boy and can look out for himself but I just think he gets a very raw deal and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.
One of the things that makes my mind up is that Holmes is very simular to Ali in style so if you pick Ali to beat Louis then you should really give Holmes the same chance. Holmes wasn't quite as fast as the peak Ali but he had the more solid jab and perhaps the better power... all in all he'd be a good pick to beat Louis I think.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:silkov, i agree ali's competetion was better than louis but defintely not holmes. holmes defended against just as many bums as louis.

Guys like scott le doux, lorenzo zanon, alfredo evangelista, ossie oscaio, lucien rodriguez, tex cobb, marvis frazier, scott frank, leroy jones, david bey, and even leon spinks. all those guys were basically journeyman.

would have liked to see holmes fight top conters or champions like greg page, pinklon thomas, tony tubbs, mike dokes, etc. rather than those guys. i mean when holmes fought witherspoon, u saw how much trouble he had with him, and weaver hurt holmes many times, so did bonecrusher have holmes in trouble not to mention norton, shaves, and snipes.

also louis domintaed his title defenses alot more than holmes did. holmes was nearely Kayoed a couple times and had trouble with many opponents and was suceptible to right hands.

no doubt joe louis would have boxed holmes, and landed his big right and eventually knock holmes out.


and if u want to question size, louis defended against a lot of big guys. but of course id rather see louis fight a skillfull 175 lb conn rather than a slow 230lb man, its about skill.

buddy baer 6'7 250lbs
abe simon 6'6 245 lb
tony galento 5'10 233lb
primo carnera 6'6 260lbs
max baer 6'3 210lbs

and when louis hit these guys they did funny things. even though louis was only 200lbs, he showed how hard he could hit. all these big guys louis dismantled easily. IMO joe louis was the hardest hitting heavyweight of all time, and these knockouts against these 5 big men can erase the critics who wonder if louis can knockout the big modern heavyweights.
u see that 360 baer did when louis hit him with a right hand in the rematch??? or how bout in the 2nd round when a louis left hook acutally lifted galento off the ground and on to his back in a half of second.

and i dont know why u see liston and foreman beating joe louis. IMO joe louis hit harder, and not only that but could box as well. he was a complete all around fighter that also had a lot of speed in his punches.

he was the most complete all around heavyweight who ever lived, he had KO power, speed, defense, decent chin, jab, boxing skills, heart, and toughness. thats why he is the greatest. and he dominated in his prime a lot more than holmes did whike facing just as good if not better competetion.

Yeah but what about those other fighters I've listed that Holmes fought during his reign?.... no way were they Journeymen.
Louis was a great fighter but always had trouble with movers... he also was vunerble to the big punch and was fairly predictable and inflexible in the ring. Louis was pretty slow footwise... he would just shuffle forward... against a mover this posed a problem. These are things that make Johnson, Ali and Holmes favourites to beat Louis imo. They were too fast, had too much guile and also they each had pretty good power too.

silkov wrote:...and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.

Silkov, I definitely agree with this. I think Holmes was a very talented and tough HW champ, and should rank with the best. And his style would give Louis, and just about anyone a difficult fight. Of course, he did fight his share of bums...

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

silkov wrote:
Lets not sit on the fence now!... ......Louis is going up and down like a rubber ball at the moment..... 8)

Sorry, but I can't put Joe down and don't want people to think that I don't rate him. My top 4 looks the same as your top 4 other than Holmes and Louis are reversed.

Joe's hands are heavy and quick but he wasn't so quick on his feet and could be dropped. I know i've had this debate before and its true that he always got up quickly and made his opponents pay... BUT being dropped by Liston or Foreman would be a bit different to being dropped by some of the emdiocre fighters Joe was floored by.

When I look at Ali i can't see him being stopped. I can't see anyone out speeding him so you've either got to be master boxer or a super human punching machine. With Johnson it's the same. he wasn't as durable as Ali but he was so hard to hit cleanly that he wasn't going to be stopped and he would be almost impossible to out box. Joe would struggle with a mover and I can see a number of guys giving him a lot of trouble.

Why do you care what other people think? . I rate Louis, . ..I rate him 4th! .
Seriously though :x I don't see me rating Louis 4th as being an insult to Joe.
Its funny that people worry about 'insulting' the memory of Louis but noone worries about insulting Larry Holmes. I know he's a big boy and can look out for himself but I just think he gets a very raw deal and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.
One of the things that makes my mind up is that Holmes is very simular to Ali in style so if you pick Ali to beat Louis then you should really give Holmes the same chance. Holmes wasn't quite as fast as the peak Ali but he had the more solid jab and perhaps the better power... all in all he'd be a good pick to beat Louis I think.

When it comes to Holmes and Louis I just give Joe the nod because I think he had quicker hands and more power. I think Joe could jab too, not quite as good as Larry but not far behind. The main thing is that Holmes was not as mobile as Ali. He could move when he wanted to but he was less of a dancer and more inclined to keep changing the angles and glide. It would be quite a chess match but I think Joe would come out on top. I would say though that there is no way Holmes gets KO'd. He was one of the most durable fighters I have ever seen.

The Great John L wrote:

silkov wrote:Only opinions ofcourse but to just pick out the Blins and Dunns that Ali fought as an example of his opposition is a little silly I'd say.

Your earlier comment was that Ali and Holmes didn't fight "half as many bums" as Louis fought. I was simply responding to this comment by listing the fighters that Ali fought that many people might consider "bums". My response was very appropriate and in no way "silly" given the context in which it was given. As I said, I consider Ali the best HW ever, and the era in which he performed during his "second career" may have had the best group of HW's active at any given time. And Ali fought and beat most of them. But that didn't really have any bearing on addressing your "bum" comment.

I didn't bring up the bums originally anyway. Personally I don't like to refer to any fighter being a 'Bum' ...better to say less talented or more talented I think.
Lets leave bums out of it.

The Great John L wrote:

silkov wrote:...and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.

Silkov, I definitely agree with this. I think Holmes was a very talented and tough HW champ, and should rank with the best. And his style would give Louis, and just about anyone a difficult fight. Of course, he did fight his share of bums...

aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh! the B word again!!!.... :x 8)

Ezzard wrote:

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote: Sorry, but I can't put Joe down and don't want people to think that I don't rate him. My top 4 looks the same as your top 4 other than Holmes and Louis are reversed.

Joe's hands are heavy and quick but he wasn't so quick on his feet and could be dropped. I know i've had this debate before and its true that he always got up quickly and made his opponents pay... BUT being dropped by Liston or Foreman would be a bit different to being dropped by some of the emdiocre fighters Joe was floored by.

When I look at Ali i can't see him being stopped. I can't see anyone out speeding him so you've either got to be master boxer or a super human punching machine. With Johnson it's the same. he wasn't as durable as Ali but he was so hard to hit cleanly that he wasn't going to be stopped and he would be almost impossible to out box. Joe would struggle with a mover and I can see a number of guys giving him a lot of trouble.

Why do you care what other people think? . I rate Louis, . ..I rate him 4th! .
Seriously though :x I don't see me rating Louis 4th as being an insult to Joe.
Its funny that people worry about 'insulting' the memory of Louis but noone worries about insulting Larry Holmes. I know he's a big boy and can look out for himself but I just think he gets a very raw deal and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.
One of the things that makes my mind up is that Holmes is very simular to Ali in style so if you pick Ali to beat Louis then you should really give Holmes the same chance. Holmes wasn't quite as fast as the peak Ali but he had the more solid jab and perhaps the better power... all in all he'd be a good pick to beat Louis I think.

When it comes to Holmes and Louis I just give Joe the nod because I think he had quicker hands and more power. I think Joe could jab too, not quite as good as Larry but not far behind. The main thing is that Holmes was not as mobile as Ali. He could move when he wanted to but he was less of a dancer and more inclined to keep changing the angles and glide. It would be quite a chess match but I think Joe would come out on top. I would say though that there is no way Holmes gets KO'd. He was one of the most durable fighters I have ever seen.

I see what you're saying but Holmes did have very good mobility and then you have to remember he probably had the best jab of any champion I think.... very fast, accurate and with good power. I see Holmes out jabbing and outmanouvering Louis. Holmes also had enough power to keep Louis respect.... it would be a tough fight but I lean clearly towards Holmes. I can even see Holmes stopping Louis in the later rounds... out of Holmes, Johnson and Ali... Holmes had the most power I think.

silkov wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

silkov wrote: Why do you care what other people think? . I rate Louis, . ..I rate him 4th! .
Seriously though :x I don't see me rating Louis 4th as being an insult to Joe.
Its funny that people worry about 'insulting' the memory of Louis but noone worries about insulting Larry Holmes. I know he's a big boy and can look out for himself but I just think he gets a very raw deal and from what I've seen of all the champions Holmes deserves to be up there with the very best and above most of the others in my opinion.
One of the things that makes my mind up is that Holmes is very simular to Ali in style so if you pick Ali to beat Louis then you should really give Holmes the same chance. Holmes wasn't quite as fast as the peak Ali but he had the more solid jab and perhaps the better power... all in all he'd be a good pick to beat Louis I think.

When it comes to Holmes and Louis I just give Joe the nod because I think he had quicker hands and more power. I think Joe could jab too, not quite as good as Larry but not far behind. The main thing is that Holmes was not as mobile as Ali. He could move when he wanted to but he was less of a dancer and more inclined to keep changing the angles and glide. It would be quite a chess match but I think Joe would come out on top. I would say though that there is no way Holmes gets KO'd. He was one of the most durable fighters I have ever seen.

I see what you're saying but Holmes did have very good mobility and then you have to remember he probably had the best jab of any champion I think.... very fast, accurate and with good power. I see Holmes out jabbing and outmanouvering Louis. Holmes also had enough power to keep Louis respect.... it would be a tough fight but I lean clearly towards Holmes. I can even see Holmes stopping Louis in the later rounds... out of Holmes, Johnson and Ali... Holmes had the most power I think.

I agree on the jab. Holmes had the best jab of any HW but Joe's was not too far behind and Joe had a better repertoire of punches. I also agree that Larry had more power than Jack or Ali, and that Joe would respect his right hand.

Joe Louis IS the greatest HW of all time!!!!!

..silkov....i don't see why you thought my post was hostile. i was just making the point that in my opinion anyone not rating the bomber way up there...okay...way way up there...would indicate the person in question didn't know much about boxiers. nor did i say that this person or persons shouldn't have the right to express his or her opinion. that's what talking boxing is all about...all of us have our favorites and non-favorites and that why it starts such lively commentary when we discuss them.

now...as to who would beat whom. i am certain that there is no heavyweight (or any other champion) who would beat all the others. styles play too much of a part. and in a series of battles one fighter might go two out of three against another.

back to telling more about the person by the way he regards highly talented people in any field. i maintain this is so about frank sinatra, duke ellington, picasso and some others. if one does not consider them in the pantheon, it says more about that person than the artists in question.

Jaclem wrote:..silkov....i don't see why you thought my post was hostile. i was just making the point that in my opinion anyone not rating the bomber way up there...okay...way way up there...would indicate the person in question didn't know much about boxiers. nor did i say that this person or persons shouldn't have the right to express his or her opinion. that's what talking boxing is all about...all of us have our favorites and non-favorites and that why it starts such lively commentary when we discuss them.

now...as to who would beat whom. i am certain that there is no heavyweight (or any other champion) who would beat all the others. styles play too much of a part. and in a series of battles one fighter might go two out of three against another.

back to telling more about the person by the way he regards highly talented people in any field. i maintain this is so about frank sinatra, duke ellington, picasso and some others. if one does not consider them in the pantheon, it says more about that person than the artists in question.

Oh so me not rating Louis in the top 2 means I don't know much about boxing does it??....... hhhhhmmmmmmmmmm!!! ...very openminded of you mate, you should go into politics!......

.....Silkov is "blinded by the Holmes". Maybe he even has a man-crush on him?

wlvrne wrote:.....Silkov is "blinded by the Holmes". Maybe he even has a man-crush on him?

I see that I've befuddled you so much with my arguments that your only course of action is to resort to troll-like jokes!.
Why don't you comeback when you've actually got something boxing related to say.

Actually you've befuddled me with bullshit instead of dazzling me with brilliance.

silkov wrote:

barry wrote:>>>..if anyone doesn't rate joe louis one or two, it tells you more about the person doing the rating than it does about joe louis.<<<

I agree, although top three would be a good argument, although I list Louis at 2.

I don't see why Louis HAS to be rated in the top 2 or 3. Its foolish to say that Holmes Doesn't merit a high rating and he had the exact style to beat Louis. That and his 21 defences against very good opposition is enough for me to put him ahead of Louis. I think Holmes is very underrated and its about time people spoke up for him. To just accept Louis as automatically the 1st or 2nd best of all time is to ignore the facts imo. He was a great champion but Holmes was a great champion too as were Ali and Johnson.... and all three had the styles to beat Louis.
I'd also favour Liston and Foreman to beat Louis but rate Louis higher overall because of his career accomplishments.
Perhaps my not rating Louis at 1 or 2 automatically shows I have a mind of my own.

I say that Holmes is the most underrated heavyweight of all time, I feel that he sometimes doesn't get credit for what he's done because of some of the things he's said or done.

But I still have Louis at 1.

Just saying that Holmes at 3 isn't ridiculous.

wlvrne wrote:Actually you've befuddled me with bullshit instead of dazzling me with brilliance.

This is the second thread on which you've bugged me about Holmes.. :x . what you got against him?. ... did he steal your woman or something?!?. 8) ..

Cmon, to each their own. Some people are saying we may have been underating Primo Carnera so there is room for all opinions.

I have to say that if I allow myself to put Holmes in the top five (which I have been tempted to do) I have to go with this theory (which I have always suspected) that the sport is for the most part continuing to evolve. Which people have taken me to the shed for time and time again. Please keep in mind that I am very old and thus very wise and so probably correct on this matter as well as anything else I opine upon.

Some here have postulated that a prime Holmes beats a prime Louis or Ali. This idea just does not work for me. I think he would be a great competitor but does not beat either of them if we consider them all in their prime.

Now I know that if you use the current talent pool to judge my evolving thesis, then it tends to stretch crediblity. However I am certain we are just in a dry period and boxing will return to evolutionary pattern very soon.

However if we allow inter gender boxing to happen, and a male kills a female in the ring, then the whole thing goes under, kaput, end of story. And we will never find out. Because they will just shut er down and down will come the curtain on boxing in general.

At least in the U.S.

BoxBuzz wrote:Cmon, to each their own. Some people are saying we may have been underating Primo Carnera so there is room for all opinions.

I have to say that if I allow myself to put Holmes in the top five (which I have been tempted to do) I have to go with this theory (which I have always suspected) that the sport is for the most part continuing to evolve. Which people have taken me to the shed for time and time again. Please keep in mind that I am very old and thus very wise and so probably correct on this matter as well as anything else I opine upon.

Some here have postulated that a prime Holmes beats a prime Louis or Ali. This idea just does not work for me. I think he would be a great competitor but does not beat either of them if we consider them all in their prime.

Now I know that if you use the current talent pool to judge my evolving thesis, then it tends to stretch crediblity. However I am certain we are just in a dry period and boxing will return to evolutionary pattern very soon.

However if we allow inter gender boxing to happen, and a male kills a female in the ring, then the whole thing goes under, kaput, end of story. And we will never find out. Because they will just shut er down and down will come the curtain on boxing in general.

At least in the U.S.

wOT YU GOIN ON ABOUT BUZZ???.

wOMEN BOXING!!!!

SAY IT AINT SO!!!!!!.....

You have to understand I need time in order to prove my theory of boxing evolution. So I have to take a stand when I seen boxing in danger of being shut down. This seems like the greatest danger to the sport I love. Should I ignore it and hope it just goes away? I can try that if you think it's the right way to go. But I'll need support.

So just like you did this time.....call me on it when you find me digressing and showing weakness. Perhaps I can find strength, and this too shall pass.

Thanks Silkov I needed that.

BoxBuzz wrote:You have to understand I need time in order to prove my theory of boxing evolution. So I have to take a stand when I seen boxing in danger of being shut down. This seems like the greatest danger to the sport I love. Should I ignore it and hope it just goes away? I can try that if you think it's the right way to go. But I'll need support.

So just like you did this time.....call me on it when you find me digressing and showing weakness. Perhaps I can find strength, and this too shall pass.

Thanks Silkov I needed that.

When the sheep are climbing the green hills they are following the birds towards water.
8)

Indeed. All eyes look to the heavens for a sign. So it's important that I keep to the flight plan.