BoxRec

1) if Joe Louis had fought during the years of WWII, how many more title defenses could he have made during that time?
2)Could Ray Robinson, Jimmy Bivins, or Charley Burley have become champions during this time?
3)Would Archie Moore have come closer to a title during this time as well?

thought about this a lot. The robinson and moore things i don't think would have changed much but louis?

Well he made 7 defences in 41 and had made two in 42 and it was only march, Id say probably 7 in 42 then if you say maybe 4 a year thats an extra 17 defences. I cant see anyone beating him so he'd have 43 defences.

Yeah, over 40 defenses sounds right for Louis under these proposed circumstances. I've got to believe that Robinson would have gotten a title shot prior to 1946 if Freddie Cochrane wasn't in the military.As for Burley, I think he would have still been avoided even if the middleweight title wasn't frozen.

I think those guys could have won titles during this time if they the opportunity. Certainly Robinson and others was good enough
Bivins very likely would have fought Louis time, and it may have been interesting.

As for the amount of title defenses for Louis, he may have got tired of beating stiffs. Then again, it was easy $ and he needed that.

goose 5 wrote: ↑25 Jun 2019, 20:55 Yeah, over 40 defenses sounds right for Louis under these proposed circumstances. I've got to believe that Robinson would have gotten a title shot prior to 1946 if Freddie Cochrane wasn't in the military.As for Burley, I think he would have still been avoided even if the middleweight title wasn't frozen.

It would of been possible. But it could of also been possible for him to get upset.

I don't think Ali's time off affected him as much as Louis in a way. If Ali hadn't been banned he'd have come up against Frazier almost certainly in 1968 and that's always a tough fight for Ali.

Louis however, I just cant see anyone upsetting him. It could have happened of course but the most likely scenario would be defences against some heavys and Lt heavys of the time and over 40 defences.

For a list of likely victims see the ring heavy rankings for those years.

Nile4000 wrote: ↑25 Jun 2019, 16:09 1) if Joe Louis had fought during the years of WWII, how many more title defenses could he have made during that time?
2)Could Ray Robinson, Jimmy Bivins, or Charley Burley have become champions during this time?
3)Would Archie Moore have come closer to a title during this time as well?

1) The 'bum of the month' was going to wear thin with the fans eventually so he may not have had as many defenses as everyone seems to think. But certainly he would have set a defenses record that would be up there with all those records considered unbreakable. E.g. DiMaggio; Cy Young, ETC.

With no war TV comes of age eight years earlier while Louis is still in his prime, so maybe I am wrong, maybe Louis does fight a bum every month, on TV. That would have worked pretty well; keep the big fights in the ball parks (and off TV) but let the sponsors pay for the 'bum' fights.

2) Robinson would have eventually gotten a shot at Cochrane in late '41 or '42. (Or whoever beats Cochrane in the interim; Cochrane was likely not to survive his first defense whoever that may have been.) Re: Burley: All the talk about Burley being ducked is overstated, at welterweight Burley had to play bridesmaid to SRR, and at middleweight he had to wait behind Holman Williams; Burley was never in position to be the top challenger. Added to that, he was a west coast fighter with no New York resume and a snoozer to watch fight. There is no title shot for Burley no matter how you alter the timeline, (and not because he was ducked, only because he was ignored, there's a difference.) I can't speak to Bivins.

2a) We should add in Holman Williams, he is the guy who was actually ducked; held the #1 middleweight ranking for '44 and '45. (and #3 and #2 in '42 and '43) IMO take out the war and its Williams who is the MW fighter who rises to the top.

3) Moore had the #1 middleweight ranking in '42 (for whatever that's worth) so maybe it would have gotten him a shot at Zale and possibly the title.

The NBA ranked Burley # 1 at welter in 1939 .

goose 5 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2019, 20:23 The NBA ranked Burley # 1 at welter in 1939 .

Yea that makes sense, the NBA had more influence in the west than it did in the east and often championed western based fighters. At times the NBA was at odds with the NYSAC's championship recognitions.

In 1940 the NBA recognized Chicago based Tony Zale as its MW champion but it took an elimination fight with Georgie Abrams in New York (MSG) to solidify Zale as MW champion.

By 1939 the welterweight champion was Henry Armstrong who was predominately (but not exclusively) a New York fighter; but if one is to claim that Burley was ducked then you have to say it was Henry Armstrong who was ducking him and that is a little hard to swallow. Burley was good, but good enough to scare off Henry Armstrong seems a stretch of the imagination.

1. The first fight between Louis and Billy Conn should be instructive. Great as Conn was and as marvelous as he performed that night, a big reason Louis almost lost was because of fatigue. That busy schedule was wearing him down. Had Louis kept fighting during the war years, my guess is that he actually would've had a bad night somewhere and lost the belt. He then would've regained the title and become the first man to regain that championship. Maybe 30 defenses over a couple of reigns?

2. Robinson would've won a title in any era. I could see Bivins picking up the light heavyweight championship or maybe being the one to upset Louis. I think Burley would've suffered the same plight he had in real life: Too much risk for too little gain. He gets shut out of the title picture.

3. In this hypothetical, I don't think Moore gets the middleweight championship. Ezzard Charles beats him to it.

when the NBA ranked Burley #1 at welter, every bout he had was in Pennsylvania; he hadn't gone west yet.

goose 5 wrote: ↑04 Jul 2019, 12:41 when the NBA ranked Burley #1 at welter, every bout he had was in Pennsylvania; he hadn't gone west yet.

OK, but it is still just an NBA ranking and unlikely to garner a title shot; again Phily is not the west, but it is also not New York. The NBA went looking for fighters to champion (rank) that were not New York affiliated.

Jersey Joe Walcott in '47 who was fighting out of Newark, NJ (New York based) was scheduled to be one of Joe Louis' four round exhibitions. (MSG) but New York refused to recognize exhibitions and created a 10 round non-title fight with the exception that if Walcott KOed Louis he could claim the crown, but there would be no decision.

Walcott then petitioned the NBA fro a ranking and the NBA obliged him making him one of their contenders. The NYSAC then had egg on its face and rescheduled the Louis-Walcott fight as a full 15 round title defense with decision. (Of course at which point Walcott got jobbed.)

Walcott's people did a nice job playing the two sanctioning bodies against each other.

What I am suggesting is that the NBA saw in Burley a legitimate #1 contender (Burley was moving up and down The Ring rankings from #4 to #2 most of the time) and could foster their own prestige by sanctioning a competitive champion like Burley.

As I stated earlier they did that with Tony Zale.

But none of that was likely to override the facts that Burley was unknown in New York (fought there only twice over 97 fights), and simply didn't bring to the table enough ticket sales to deserve a shot at the title.