BoxRec

I recall a intrview that Mike DeLisa once done, and how he once said that he held a theory that on the night a champion won the title, that there was no other fighter of any era, that could have beaten them on that night.

This theory made me think quite a bit, and while I believe there is some credability to it, it does make me wonder if it really could apply to every championship fight there ever was, despite the weight class?

So in the interest of fun, I thought why not start at the top and name a Heavyweight who won the title, and discuss whether or not if there was any contender at that time who could have beaten him, or if there is any Heavyweight champion past or present who could have beaten him on the night he won his title.

For all intents and purposes, let's start off with the legendary Joe Louis. On the night he defeated Jim Braddock in eight rounds, was there any contender on the radar who could have defeated him at that moment and time? And, what other heavyweight titlist could have defeated the Louis who defeated Braddock?

[Myself, I will keep my opinion out of it for the time being, but I do believe there was a few who could have done the deed; because the Schmeling rematch was actually Joe's best bout, not his win over Braddock, and its that match I cannot invision any heavyweight ever beating him in]

I think you've over-thought it just a touch, Henry me ole mucker

Gotta say, the idea that no contender of the time could beat a champ on the night he won the title? Pretty feeble. The idea that no champion from another era could have bested him? Ludicrous.

Where is the logic in this fella's statement? It is, on many an occasion, not even the new champion's career-best performance (as you alluded to), further voiding the idea. You also run into difficulties with the reality of the situation --- that is, Louis may have fought gameplan X against Braddock, which mightn't have been particularly effective against, say, Tyson, when it's patently obvious his gameplan would have changed to suit the opponent.

Awful tough to compare.

I have to agree with Goodnight that it's silly to think that as a rule no other contender could have beaten the fighter who won the championship on that day. Probably more more often than not, the new champion was the best fighter in the world, but there are certainly many exceptions.

As for Joe Louis, he probably would have beaten any other contender on the night that he beat Braddock.

As for the other question whether any other fighter could have beat Louis that night against Braddock? Well, Ali would have. A few other fighters would have had a chance, (Johnson, Dempsey, Foreman, Frazier the rest of the usual suspects) but Louis more than likely would have won.

Ambling Alp wrote:I have to agree with Goodnight that it's silly to think that as a rule no other contender could have beaten the fighter who won the championship on that day. Probably more more often than not, the new champion was the best fighter in the world, but there are certainly many exceptions.

As for Joe Louis, he probably would have beaten any other contender on the night that he beat Braddock.

As for the other question whether any other fighter could have beat Louis that night against Braddock? Well, Ali would have. A few other fighters would have had a chance, (Johnson, Dempsey, Foreman, Frazier the rest of the usual suspects) but Louis more than likely would have won.

Great fighters often step it up in their first title shots; Dempsey, Marciano, Moore, Patterson, Liston, Clay, Napoles, Duran, Monzon, Foreman, Holmes, Hearns, Sanchez, Qawi, Tyson, Holyfield etc. etc. you could go on and on when it comes to great fighters who took it to another level in their effort to win their first belt. That didn't make them unbeatable, however.

"As for the other question whether any other fighter could have beat Louis that night against Braddock? Well, Ali would have..." - Alp

Yep, agreed. & we all know how Ali would have looked after his title-winning rope-a-dope effort against Foreman had he tried it on a 23-year-old Louis don't we, or as he'd be known after that fight...Dribblin' Mo

Right, IFF? *GI runs from torrent of abuse ala Hopkins in Puerto Rico*

Bottom line is this --- it's pretty difficult to get a grip on the situation, because a fighter's gameplan changes to suit the opponent.

I didnt say that Alp did


Anyways...how about another example...

On the day Jack Dempsey slaughtered the mammoth Jess Willard in Toledo, Ohio...what contender at that time could have beaten Dempsey that night...and what champion [and ffs lets excuse Ali from these things cus thats everybody's scape goat] could have defeated the Dempsey of that day?

Ahhh, crap, I just went back & fixed it

Okay, Dempsey. I don't know how good he was that night, but that afternoon he was pretty hard to handle. Thinking, thinking...

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"As for the other question whether any other fighter could have beat Louis that night against Braddock? Well, Ali would have..." - Alp

Yep, agreed. & we all know how Ali would have looked after his title-winning rope-a-dope effort against Foreman had he tried it on a 23-year-old Louis don't we, or as he'd be known after that fight...Dribblin' Mo

Right, IFF? *GI runs from torrent of abuse ala Hopkins in Puerto Rico*

Bottom line is this --- it's pretty difficult to get a grip on the situation, because a fighter's gameplan changes to suit the opponent.

Goodnight,
First of all, I thought we were talking about other fighters at their best. Ali may or may not have beaten Louis when he was 32 and fighting Foreman. Ali was still great, but not his best.

However, Ali's best was from 1964-1967. I know that the anti-Ali people don't like to talk about this and like to pretend this time period never happened, but it did. This Ali would have beaten Louis.

Not specifically, no. We were talking about fighters in their title-winning efforts.

HomicideHenry wrote:I didnt say that Alp did


Anyways...how about another example...

On the day Jack Dempsey slaughtered the mammoth Jess Willard in Toledo, Ohio...what contender at that time could have beaten Dempsey that night...and what champion [and ffs lets excuse Ali from these things cus thats everybody's scape goat] could have defeated the Dempsey of that day?

Foreman against Frazier? I can't think of a contender of the day. A few would be genuinely competitive, but I don't know if they'd actually beat Dempsey, who was a man possessed in that bout.

Correct!

What Ali there would be would have been the 1964 Ali and PRIOR, not the 64-67 "ultimate prime" Ali, when he was completely at his best; he had yet to easily thwart Terrell, and have his "greatest" fight against Cleveland Williams.

So, really, you have three Ali's to chose:

-The Ali of 1964 and prior [first Liston match]
-The Ali of 1974 [George Foreman]
-The Ali of 1978-1979 [rematch with Spinks to his retirement]

Those were the three moments when Ali won the undisputed title. So really, in a sense, the Ali that fought Foreman to his loss to Spinks is the best 'champion' version of Ali, at least in this discussion.

Do you think the Ali who had fought Liston the first time, and relatively nothing else significant on his record than the Cooper bout and Doug Jones, could beat the Joe Louis who defeated Braddock?

The Ali who beat Liston and the Ali who beat Foreman would have, by different means, beaten, and perhaps knocked out, the Louis who fought Braddock. Its easy (unless you're Max Baer) to look good when you're fighting Jim Braddock (though Braddock did manage a flash knockdown) but Ali in those two fights was looking good against and beating two guys who might have knocked Louis out themselves.

Well, if follow that logic, and we are going to count what Ali did prior to 1964 when comparing him to Louis, we should also include the Ali prior to 1974 when comparing the Ali of 1974 to Louis.

Then of course, we would have to include the Ali of prior 1978 when we compare the Ali of 1978 against Louis.

And we would also have judge what Louis did prior to fighting Braddock.

What would make much more sense is to compare Ali on the night he won the title to Louis on the night that he won the title.
I would pick the Ali of 1964 that beat Liston to beat the Louis that beat Braddock.

I would lean toward the Ali of 1974 that beat Foreman to beat the Louis that beat Braddock. Certainly arguable.

I would pick the Louis that beat Braddock to beat the Ali that beat Spinks.

The Ali who fought Foreman would have almost twenty pounds on the Louis who got dropped by Braddock. He would have manhandled Louis. That to go with his speed advantage and better chin and greater experience. People tend to think of Ali vs. Louis as speed vs. power, but the Ali who fought Foreman would hurt Louis with every punch.

The Ali who fought Foreman had the edge in footspeed only --- handspeed & reflexes favour the younger Louis. At some point, Ali has to come down off his toes. When he does, he gets slayed. I don't think this would be very close once Ali stopped moving.

The Ali of the mid-to-late 60's would stand a much better chance of victory, & may even be the favourite.

People tend to think of Ali vs. Louis as speed vs. power, but the Ali who fought Foreman would hurt Louis with every punch.

I disagree, sure Ali by that time was more flat footed, so he would have used force from the floor for his punches [in his prime he fought off his toes, all his punches had very little force behind them]...mind you, Louis, though knocked down by Braddock early on, wouldn't get knocked down again until Two Ton Tony Galento, and it would be almost a decade later would he get knocked off his feet again, that time against Walcott.

I dont think "every punch" would have hurt Joe Louis.

He was down against Baer between Galento & Walcott, Henry. When you're a forward-moving fighter as opposed to a backward-moving one, of course you're more likely to be floored more often. Louis surely didn't have a chin as good as Ali's, but the difference is exacerbated by their styles.

Goonight- If Ali could take everything that Foreman could dish out, he can take anything that Louis could. Foreman hit much harder than Louis and didn't come close to stopping Ali. No way is Louis going to "slay" Ali. Dream on.

The Ali of 1974 still had better handspeed than Joe Louis ever did. Louis had good hand speed but it was never anything exceptional.

Homocide-Louis was also knocked down by Buddy Baer between the Galento and Walcott fights.

I dont think it would be so much power, that could get Ali down, but sheer accuracy and technique...Joe Frazier left hook in 1971 was a perfect shot and Ali went down like a lead balloon [yes he got up quick, but thats not the point]. Louis was all about technique and his punches were lightning quick and were like a trip hammer.

I could see him catching Ali with those combinations sooner or later.

Ambling Alp wrote:Goonight- If Ali could take everything that Foreman could dish out, he can take anything that Louis could. Foreman hit much harder than Louis and didn't come close to stopping Ali. No way is Louis going to "slay" Ali. Dream on.

The Ali of 1974 still had better handspeed than Joe Louis ever did. Louis had good hand speed but it was never anything exceptional.

Homocide-Louis was also knocked down by Buddy Baer between the Galento and Walcott fights.

It's called technique, Alp. Louis' handspeed (which you drastically underestimate) merge with his far superior punching technique & subsequent precision to Foreman. Where Foreman misses or strikes elbows, Frazier was able to land cleanly & consistently. Frazier did it, Louis would do it. It's moot, because Ali is too smart to lay on the ropes, so it wouldn't go down that way.

However, there is no comparison between punching style for Louis & Foreman. When stationary, Ali could make Foreman miss. He couldn't do it to Louis. I'd also contest the idea that Foreman hit much harder than did Louis --- the power is comparable, there is a close but clear edge to Foreman, however, Louis' power is approaching Foreman's, but his handspeed, punching technique, & shortness of punch would be the difference against a slowing, ageing Ali.

"Louis never had exceptional handspeed..."

I wouldn't be the only one dreaming then, I take it.

No, I would agree that Ali taking Foreman's punches doesn't necessarily mean that he takes Louis' punches. For example, I'm sure Shavers hit harder than Tyson, but you're more likely to get knocked out by a Tyson shot. That said, I do think Foreman hit harder than Louis, while Louis never fought a fighter with Ali's chin or who had Ali's ability to absord body shots. And, again, Ali himself has almost twenty pounds on that Louis. If they were similar in weight Ali would still have the best chin Louis has ever seen, but with a twenty pound weight edge Louis has a lot of problems hurting Ali, and Ali might in fact bully Louis if Joe gets too close. Look at how he manhandled Foreman, and Louis isn't as strong as George.

Louis wouldn't have put swarming pressure on Ali as Foreman did, so Ali wouldn't have been on the ropes and in the corners as much. And he didn't spend 100% of the Foreman fight on the ropes to begin with, he was in the center of the ring more often than is mentioned.

As for Ali's punch, Ali was capable of staggering Foreman with a majority of the shots that he landed squarely, and for my money George had a better chin than Louis. And George weighed over twenty pounds more than Louis did when he fought Braddock. With his reach Ali would have been landing a lot of shots on the outside on Louis and Louis would have been feeling those punches. Not saying that Ali scores some early knock out, but those punches can accumulate, especially by the time you get to the championship rounds. I think a late stoppage for Ali is extremely plausible, maybe even likely.

As for the point about speed; I think Ali's hands were still clearly faster. His reflexes were still decent. Louis had great handspeed, but even at 32 I'd give the nod to Ali in that category.

How about the Thomas Hearns that KO'd Pipino Cuevas that night?

would any other welter in history would have beaten him?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Goonight- If Ali could take everything that Foreman could dish out, he can take anything that Louis could. Foreman hit much harder than Louis and didn't come close to stopping Ali. No way is Louis going to "slay" Ali. Dream on.

The Ali of 1974 still had better handspeed than Joe Louis ever did. Louis had good hand speed but it was never anything exceptional.

Homocide-Louis was also knocked down by Buddy Baer between the Galento and Walcott fights.

It's called technique, Alp. Louis' handspeed (which you drastically underestimate) merge with his far superior punching technique & subsequent precision to Foreman. Where Foreman misses or strikes elbows, Frazier was able to land cleanly & consistently. Frazier did it, Louis would do it. It's moot, because Ali is too smart to lay on the ropes, so it wouldn't go down that way.

However, there is no comparison between punching style for Louis & Foreman. When stationary, Ali could make Foreman miss. He couldn't do it to Louis. I'd also contest the idea that Foreman hit much harder than did Louis --- the power is comparable, there is a close but clear edge to Foreman, however, Louis' power is approaching Foreman's, but his handspeed, punching technique, & shortness of punch would be the difference against a slowing, ageing Ali.

"Louis never had exceptional handspeed..."

I wouldn't be the only one dreaming then, I take it.

I have never heard even the biggest Joe Louis fan claim that he had exceptional handspeed. Many of his fights (including the Braddock fight) on tape. He simply wasn't that fast. It's all there on film.

If Ali could take all the shots that Foreman hit him with and not even come close to being knocked out, Joe Louis isn't going to do it. You mention Frazier. Well, Frazier didn't knockout Ali either.

As I Feel Fine touched on, you also have to look at the other side of the coin. Could Ali stop Louis? I would say it's much more likely. Louis was stopped by Schmeling. He was dropped by Braddock, who had mediocre power at best. He was knocked out of the ring by Buddy Baer. He was knocked down by Galento. Ali stopped a lot of guys who were hard to stop. It's certainly possible that Louis wouldn't go the distance.

I'm not saying that Louis would have no chance. I would just give Ali the edge.
Of course this comparison isn't really fair is it? We should be comparing Louis and Ali when they were at similar stages in their careers.


But of course anti-Ali people never want to do that. (Funny how we never hear about how a post WWII Joe Louis would do against Ali in his first title reign.)

How about Ali from 1964-1967 to Louis of 1937-1941? They were both at their best then.
Or how about Ali after his comeback (1970-1975) to Louis after World War II?
Those comparisons would be much more relevant.

As for who was more impressive Louis when he won the title against Braddock or Ali when he beat Foreman? They both knocked out their opponent in 8 rounds. Louis was dropped by his opponent, Ali wasn't. Louis' opponent hadn't fought in 2 years. Most importantly Foreman was a much, much tougher opponent than Braddock.

I don't mean to rip Joe Louis. He was probably one of the 10 best fighters of all time and the #2 heavyweight of all time.

elmersalsa wrote:How about the Thomas Hearns that KO'd Pipino Cuevas that night?

would any other welter in history would have beaten him?

Besides the obvious person who did beat Hearns, Robinson probably would have, and few other great welters may have.
But yes, that was a devastating knockout by Hearns.

I think elmer's question is sort of a good illustration of the logic of this thread. Hearns on the night that he beat Cuevas was not better than Hearns on the night that he lost to Leonard; it was simply the opponent. Hearns on the night he lost to Leonard would knock out Cuevas just as quickly, if not more so. People often assume that when a fighter wins it was because he "had a good night" and assume that when a fighter loses its because he "had a bad night." That might be true sometimes, but I would say more often it has to do with the opponent. Just because Hearns lost to Leonard on that night didn't make it a "bad night" for Hearns, quite the opposite, Hearns put on a great performance.

Point being, Hearns beat Cuevas because he was fighting Cuevas, not because he was unbeatable on that night. If he had been in with Hagler on that night he would have lost. Just like when people say that Ali was at his best on the night that he beat Cleveland Williams. I doubt that the Ali on that night was particularly better than the Ali who fought Terrell or the Ali who fought Folley, it simply had to do with who the opponent was on the night he fought Williams.

I hope this post makes sense, but I think its the right answer to the question of this thread.

As for Alp's last point... while I disagree about Louis not having great handspeed (I think he did for a Heavyweight, though I don't think his hands were faster than Ali's in '74) and while I do think that taking Louis' punches is different from taking Foreman's punches because of technique and Louis' combination punching and so forth; I've always thought that it is a hard challenge for Louis' fans (or for any fanbase for that matter, whether it be a Tyson fan or a Dempsey fan or a Marciano fan) to explain how exactly Louis is going to knock out a guy who fought Liston, Foreman, Frazier and Shavers. Its all well and good to say that Louis was a better fighter and could throw combinations and all of those things, but at the end of the day Ali survived against the biggest punchers in Heavyweight history and that isn't something that just anyone can say. Taking it for granted that Ali can be knocked out is only a little less presumptuous than assuming that Hagler or a prime Chavez or a Lightweight Duran could be knocked out.

As far as I'm concerned Ali winning by knockout is much more likely than Louis winning by knockout. Louis is the question mark, not Ali. Ali was tested in much tougher conditions.