BoxRec

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 10:07 of course, and alp will tell you about just how good tony was. surely he must be very good to trouble the atg #2, isn't that right alp.

Controversial wrote: ↑11 Oct 2021, 04:47 Always a topic of debate. Quite often argued that guys like Marciano and Frazier could compete with todays heavyweights, has anyone changed their mind on this? We can point to blown up CW Usyk beating man mountain AJ but then we see Fury weighing 20 stone and making a 6’7” 17 stone Wilder look fairly small. Are today’s heavyweights now too big when it comes to fairly comparing eras like the 1950s etc ? Or do you think the skill sets outweighs the physical advantages?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 08:10 If they wouldn't have fought, I would not have thought thought that Conn would have fought so well against the 2nd best heavyweight of all time either. But he did. It didn't seem like a fluke. If he could do that, it's not out of the question that he could compete against people not nearly as good as Louis.

But it's very revealing that people don't think Carnera, Simon and Baer would be in the top 10. Weight is just a convenient excuse for many people. They just want to talk about the recent heavyweights and dismiss those that came before their time.

The heavyweight division has be bad for a really long time. About 20 years. 12 rounds of stare downs and clinchfests. This is a major reason why so many people gave up on the sport.

But anyway, we might as well get to the big question. Would a prime Joe Louis be the best heavyweight today?

pound per pound wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 11:45

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 08:10 If they wouldn't have fought, I would not have thought thought that Conn would have fought so well against the 2nd best heavyweight of all time either. But he did. It didn't seem like a fluke. If he could do that, it's not out of the question that he could compete against people not nearly as good as Louis.

But it's very revealing that people don't think Carnera, Simon and Baer would be in the top 10. Weight is just a convenient excuse for many people. They just want to talk about the recent heavyweights and dismiss those that came before their time.

The heavyweight division has be bad for a really long time. About 20 years. 12 rounds of stare downs and clinchfests. This is a major reason why so many people gave up on the sport.

But anyway, we might as well get to the big question. Would a prime Joe Louis be the best heavyweight today?

Louis has a losing on the cards to Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles. Yes, these were the best boxers he fought and look at the results. Think about it and Carrera, Simon and Baer weren't skilled for their time, and would be badly skilled compared to the best super heavyweights today. Think about it for a moment. Louis could win with power but so could they. He wouldn't win on the cards, fair score cards. If Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles could do that to Louis so could Bowe ( in shape ) Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Also Usyk. This group can also punch real hard.

Louis benefitted for 15 rounds, light 6-8 ounce gloves, unskilled contenders aside form Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles, and some home cookin' on the score cards in Godoy and Walcott fights. Think about it and if the Conn fights was 12 rounds and Billy wasn't stupid in the 13th, he looses to the 168 pound Conn.

Hard truths.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 17:45

pound per pound wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 11:45

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 08:10 If they wouldn't have fought, I would not have thought thought that Conn would have fought so well against the 2nd best heavyweight of all time either. But he did. It didn't seem like a fluke. If he could do that, it's not out of the question that he could compete against people not nearly as good as Louis.

But it's very revealing that people don't think Carnera, Simon and Baer would be in the top 10. Weight is just a convenient excuse for many people. They just want to talk about the recent heavyweights and dismiss those that came before their time.

The heavyweight division has be bad for a really long time. About 20 years. 12 rounds of stare downs and clinchfests. This is a major reason why so many people gave up on the sport.

But anyway, we might as well get to the big question. Would a prime Joe Louis be the best heavyweight today?

Louis has a losing on the cards to Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles. Yes, these were the best boxers he fought and look at the results. Think about it and Carrera, Simon and Baer weren't skilled for their time, and would be badly skilled compared to the best super heavyweights today. Think about it for a moment. Louis could win with power but so could they. He wouldn't win on the cards, fair score cards. If Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles could do that to Louis so could Bowe ( in shape ) Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Also Usyk. This group can also punch real hard.

Louis benefitted for 15 rounds, light 6-8 ounce gloves, unskilled contenders aside form Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles, and some home cookin' on the score cards in Godoy and Walcott fights. Think about it and if the Conn fights was 12 rounds and Billy wasn't stupid in the 13th, he looses to the 168 pound Conn.

Hard truths.

Louis had not reached his prime when he fought Schmeling the first time. Look what happned when he was in his prime for the rematch. He was clearly past it his best when he fought Walcott and Charles. He had been off during World War II.
Have never heard any dispute the verdict of the Godoy fight before. Not sn impressive performance, but Louis deserved the decision. And look at the rematch.

The skilled heavyweights of today? That is what I am saying. Usyk has skill. fury has some skill and some limitations. Just about everyone else suck. there is a reason why almost all of the heavyweight fights suck. It because the fighters suck.
Baer, Carnera, and Simon would be in the top 10 today. Louis dominated them.

Louis was as fundamentally sound of a fighter as you will ever find. He had a high work rate. He was an accurate puncher. He had a lot of power. Against anyone that would fight in recent times, he would be throwing a lot more punches than the other guy. He was more accurate than them. He had more power than almost all of them.

That we even had to argue this shows how overrated recent heavyweights are by some people.

oogiebe wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 18:12

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 17:45

pound per pound wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 11:45

Louis has a losing on the cards to Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles. Yes, these were the best boxers he fought and look at the results. Think about it and Carrera, Simon and Baer weren't skilled for their time, and would be badly skilled compared to the best super heavyweights today. Think about it for a moment. Louis could win with power but so could they. He wouldn't win on the cards, fair score cards. If Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles could do that to Louis so could Bowe ( in shape ) Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Also Usyk. This group can also punch real hard.

Louis benefitted for 15 rounds, light 6-8 ounce gloves, unskilled contenders aside form Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles, and some home cookin' on the score cards in Godoy and Walcott fights. Think about it and if the Conn fights was 12 rounds and Billy wasn't stupid in the 13th, he looses to the 168 pound Conn.

Hard truths.

Louis had not reached his prime when he fought Schmeling the first time. Look what happned when he was in his prime for the rematch. He was clearly past it his best when he fought Walcott and Charles. He had been off during World War II.
Have never heard any dispute the verdict of the Godoy fight before. Not sn impressive performance, but Louis deserved the decision. And look at the rematch.

The skilled heavyweights of today? That is what I am saying. Usyk has skill. fury has some skill and some limitations. Just about everyone else suck. there is a reason why almost all of the heavyweight fights suck. It because the fighters suck.
Baer, Carnera, and Simon would be in the top 10 today. Louis dominated them.

Louis was as fundamentally sound of a fighter as you will ever find. He had a high work rate. He was an accurate puncher. He had a lot of power. Against anyone that would fight in recent times, he would be throwing a lot more punches than the other guy. He was more accurate than them. He had more power than almost all of them.

That we even had to argue this shows how overrated recent heavyweights are by some people.

I think I remember that the crowd booed the decision in the Godoy fight.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑16 May 2022, 10:45 The UP had it even.
International News had it for Louis. 9-6-1
AP for Louis. 10-5.
NY Times for Louis. 10-5.

Have never heard anyone in my entire life question this decision, much less call it a robbery.

Wasn't a pretty fight, but Louis clearly won.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑16 May 2022, 15:33 Would have thought I would have heard of this robbery before. It's been 80 years. Saw the fight. It was not a robbery.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑16 May 2022, 16:00 "home cookin"
"Godoy was thought to be robbed."

You ever see the fight?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑17 May 2022, 16:02 Moving the goal posts? Whatever.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑16 May 2022, 16:00 "home cookin"
"Godoy was thought to be robbed."

You ever see the fight?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 17:45

pound per pound wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 11:45

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 08:10 If they wouldn't have fought, I would not have thought thought that Conn would have fought so well against the 2nd best heavyweight of all time either. But he did. It didn't seem like a fluke. If he could do that, it's not out of the question that he could compete against people not nearly as good as Louis.

But it's very revealing that people don't think Carnera, Simon and Baer would be in the top 10. Weight is just a convenient excuse for many people. They just want to talk about the recent heavyweights and dismiss those that came before their time.

The heavyweight division has be bad for a really long time. About 20 years. 12 rounds of stare downs and clinchfests. This is a major reason why so many people gave up on the sport.

But anyway, we might as well get to the big question. Would a prime Joe Louis be the best heavyweight today?

Louis has a losing on the cards to Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles. Yes, these were the best boxers he fought and look at the results. Think about it and Carrera, Simon and Baer weren't skilled for their time, and would be badly skilled compared to the best super heavyweights today. Think about it for a moment. Louis could win with power but so could they. He wouldn't win on the cards, fair score cards. If Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles could do that to Louis so could Bowe ( in shape ) Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Also Usyk. This group can also punch real hard.

Louis benefitted for 15 rounds, light 6-8 ounce gloves, unskilled contenders aside form Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles, and some home cookin' on the score cards in Godoy and Walcott fights. Think about it and if the Conn fights was 12 rounds and Billy wasn't stupid in the 13th, he looses to the 168 pound Conn.

Hard truths.

Louis had not reached his prime when he fought Schmeling the first time. Look what happned when he was in his prime for the rematch. He was clearly past it his best when he fought Walcott and Charles. He had been off during World War II.
Have never heard any dispute the verdict of the Godoy fight before. Not sn impressive performance, but Louis deserved the decision. And look at the rematch.

The skilled heavyweights of today? That is what I am saying. Usyk has skill. fury has some skill and some limitations. Just about everyone else suck. there is a reason why almost all of the heavyweight fights suck. It because the fighters suck.
Baer, Carnera, and Simon would be in the top 10 today. Louis dominated them.

Louis was as fundamentally sound of a fighter as you will ever find. He had a high work rate. He was an accurate puncher. He had a lot of power. Against anyone that would fight in recent times, he would be throwing a lot more punches than the other guy. He was more accurate than them. He had more power than almost all of them.

That we even had to argue this shows how overrated recent heavyweights are by some people.

pound per pound wrote: ↑19 May 2022, 08:21

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 17:45

pound per pound wrote: ↑15 May 2022, 11:45

Louis has a losing on the cards to Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles. Yes, these were the best boxers he fought and look at the results. Think about it and Carrera, Simon and Baer weren't skilled for their time, and would be badly skilled compared to the best super heavyweights today. Think about it for a moment. Louis could win with power but so could they. He wouldn't win on the cards, fair score cards. If Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles could do that to Louis so could Bowe ( in shape ) Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, and Fury. Also Usyk. This group can also punch real hard.

Louis benefitted for 15 rounds, light 6-8 ounce gloves, unskilled contenders aside form Scheming, Conn, Walcott, and Charles, and some home cookin' on the score cards in Godoy and Walcott fights. Think about it and if the Conn fights was 12 rounds and Billy wasn't stupid in the 13th, he looses to the 168 pound Conn.

Hard truths.

Louis had not reached his prime when he fought Schmeling the first time. Look what happned when he was in his prime for the rematch. He was clearly past it his best when he fought Walcott and Charles. He had been off during World War II.
Have never heard any dispute the verdict of the Godoy fight before. Not sn impressive performance, but Louis deserved the decision. And look at the rematch.

The skilled heavyweights of today? That is what I am saying. Usyk has skill. fury has some skill and some limitations. Just about everyone else suck. there is a reason why almost all of the heavyweight fights suck. It because the fighters suck.
Baer, Carnera, and Simon would be in the top 10 today. Louis dominated them.

Louis was as fundamentally sound of a fighter as you will ever find. He had a high work rate. He was an accurate puncher. He had a lot of power. Against anyone that would fight in recent times, he would be throwing a lot more punches than the other guy. He was more accurate than them. He had more power than almost all of them.

That we even had to argue this shows how overrated recent heavyweights are by some people.

Um, his best filmed match according or one of them according to historians I know and me was Vs. Max Baer. Louis was excellent and showed movement in his feet, ducking, and of course an in gear offense vs the apathetic Baer who didn't land a punch square or threw many. He was younger for this fight the Schmeilng, who was thought to be past it according to Historian Bert Sugar and the germans. He was also smoke hot vs Uzcudun and Carrera and they were before Schmeling, Carrera is on film, Uzcudun only a small part of it. These fights were pre Max Schemling and he certainly looked like he was in his prime! You are wrong, I suspect an attempt to " excuse Joe Louis " from defeat. Louis matured quickly and won 24 fights before this happened. Enough experience when you consider who he fought.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑18 May 2022, 16:01 I know this is the part where you say that someone in the 1970s said the heavyweights in the 1970s were that good.
However, in every era there are people that say the division was bad, and others that say it was good.
We need to think for ourselves.

The 1970s was great. The 1980s was not as good.
In the 1990s, the consensus was that it was better than the 1980s and not as good as the 1970s. Don't recall many saying the era sucked, but I'm sure you can find someone.

On difference is that in the 1970s, people didn't automatically fighters from before the 1970s. Everyone still knew Joe Louis was great. Which is what happens now. Many people have little to no interest in what happened before they started getting interested in the sport. They have no patience for all time lists that aren't full of fighters from their time.

On average, the heavyweight division has gone up and down. It has just never been this down for this long.
The rest of the divisions go up and down as well. People just don't talk about it nearly as often.
All in all, if you take all the divisions combined, then boxing is is almost always about the same in quality.
Other divisions don't get ripped for being bad nearly as much. You don't hear people saying :boy the middle weight division sucks." Sometimes it is not good and no one talks about it.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑19 May 2022, 10:57 As for the Godoy fight? Louis was not "befuddled". Godoy to his credit fought a good fight and one that was hard to judge. However, Louis landed more clean shots on Godoy than Godoy landed. Agree that the Farr fight was closer than 13-1. However, Arthur Donavan was one of the most respected officials in boxing. I think I saw the fight on Classic Sports Network or ESPN Classic many years ago. There used to be a lot of interesting old fights on those networks. I think it has been on Youtube as well.

Early in his career. Usually it didn't hurt much since he overwhelmed the other guy anyway. Louis had a habit of dropping his hand right after a punch. Schmeling jumped all over that. He stopped doing that after that fight.
Baer hand injured hands and didn't fight well against Louis.

You say that I have a habit of avoiding your questions. Didn't think I did, but sorry if I have. There has been a lot going on with this topic. Go ahead and ask again and I will answer them. Not that you will like my answers.