BoxRec

Alot has been said, speculated, debated and argued about these years in the career of the Brown Bomber. Most people will write it off, saying that Louis was old, washed up, and was an "echo of what he once was", as Bert Randolph Sugar would famously say. However, I have always been of the opinion--- outside of Charles and Marciano, the legendary champion did not in any way, shape or form look bad at all in the ring during those later years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKjjXk3YJrA

^^^Joe Louis vs Rex Layne (exhibition) 1950

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP04YUJt6XQ

^^^ Joe Louis vs Pat Valentino (exhibition)

It was such performances as these that made Louis reconsider an actual pro comeback. He actually kayoed the likes of Pat Valentino (8th round) and others, in such exhibitions. It was because of these successes that he made a real return. Considering everything, he still was able to make himself the number one contender to Walcott, but because he was in such dire financial straits he begged Marciano to fight him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR9zg7B-4p8

^^^ Joe Louis vs Lee Savold (1951)

Savold for a time was considered the 'champion' by the BBBC believe it or not. Louis kayoed him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVdod4wXtEU

^^^Joe Louis vs Freddie Beshore (1951)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbHDMxH4YZc

^^^Louis vs Brion I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny6l9VPbhRg

^^^Louis vs Brion II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YLR5zik8H8

^^^Louis vs Agramonte II

Gives everyone an insight into what Louis had left. Was he a "has been"... not in my eyes. He was still capable, skilled, and strong enough to defeat fringe contenders and top ten contenders. He just simply wasn't good enough to defeat guys who were equally as good as he was, who were in their prime years.

I would argue the point that the guys who beat Louis-Marciano and Charles in particular- were as good as Louis in their respective primes. IMO they weren't. Not even close.

Broomhall wrote:I would argue the point that the guys who beat Louis-Marciano and Charles in particular- were as good as Louis in their respective primes. IMO they weren't. Not even close.

Your statement made no sense... mainly cus Marciano never lost.

And no one is stating that they were as good as people in their primes... but rather that Louis in his comeback years was far better than people actually give credit for.

He wasn't the same force, his record shows that.

Before first retirement he was 58(49)-1 and he was on the slide then.

When he came back his record was 8(3)-2

His high ko ratio dropped quite significantly and of the 3 stoppages he got one was on a cut and another was around a minute from lasting the full 10 rounds.

He had some ability still but not the same fighter.

IMO he looked like the prototype of a shot fighter in his comeback. Output much lower, couldn't get his punches off, reflexes dulled, power not the same and difficulty in cutting off the ring like he did so well in his prime. He still had a strong jab and enough experience and aura to beat fringe contenders but he was far far from what he had once been, far from what he was against Walcott in his last pre-comeback fight too.

That's a pretty accurate account. He would land a good shot, but couldn't follow up on it. He had become very slow. He had a lot of trouble with Brion, whom he probably would have beaten easily in his prime.

I don't argue that he was slower, etc.

But he was certainly good enough even at this stage to of beaten the majority of contenders.

Sure, he would never of beaten Charles, Walcott, Marciano, etc. at this stage of his career, but that being said I would bet the house anyone else in the top ten he would of beaten.

I know im in the minority however, I never thought much of Louis, he was down many times.
he could be hit, his opposition was never great. hence " bum of the month" I think Marciano could

have taken him out young or old. ditto, ali, foreman. frazier. holmes, quarry. all of these gentlemen
at their best of course.

hhaehre wrote:IMO he looked like the prototype of a shot fighter in his comeback. Output much lower, couldn't get his punches off, reflexes dulled, power not the same and difficulty in cutting off the ring like he did so well in his prime. He still had a strong jab and enough experience and aura to beat fringe contenders but he was far far from what he had once been, far from what he was against Walcott in his last pre-comeback fight too.

Agree. I'm always amazed at how dramatically his handspeed and ability to throw combinations declined from the Walcott fights to his bouts in the early 50s, even vs Charles in 1950. He was still a good fighter, but it was definitely a steep drop-off in those 3 years.