Joe Louis vs Ali, Liston, Frazier, and Foreman?

[Tom Cruise]

This is worth a watch. Obviously Louis isnt going to be using Ali esque movement, but the overreaching and being consistently countered over the jab falls right into Louis' major strength, counterpunching.

This one too for Joe Frazier.



I definitely wouldnt count Louis out in these fights, with the possible exception of Ali, who just seems to have the perfect style to beat him.

[Tom Cruise]

from 4.09 is quite an interesting bit on Norton jabbing with Ali. Like i say though this is an older Ali, to beat him doing this in his prime you need to get close to him first, and be in some sort of position to throw decent punches

[Anthony342]

Yeah, I'd say he has loses to Ali, but has a good shot to beat the other 3, especially if he can make it to the later rounds.

[Joe Beamish]

How would you confirm your statement above? I have never heard such a thing. Its hard to imagine Louis not training for a bout. Not trying to doubt your verocity but have never heard such a thing said about Louis. What I observed and was told was that
Schmeling found a glitch involving a tendency Louis had dropping his right after a jab. Schmeling studied tape and was able to execute.

Louis didn't train seriously for the first Schmeling fight. The Wikipedia entry on the first fight provides two sources for the following statement:

"Nevertheless, many boxing fans considered Schmeling, 30 years old by the time of his first match with Louis, to be on the decline and not a serious challenge for the Brown Bomber.[1]

Perhaps as a result, Louis took training for the Schmeling fight none too seriously. Louis' training retreat was at Lakewood, New Jersey, where Louis was introduced to the game of golf – later to become a lifelong passion. Louis spent significant time on the golf course rather than training.[2][3]"

Schmeling was a smart fighter, and he worked out a good strategy. But Louis was asleep in the head that first fight. He expected a walkover.

[billeau2]

Louis didn't train seriously for the first Schmeling fight. The Wikipedia entry on the first fight provides two sources for the following statement:

"Nevertheless, many boxing fans considered Schmeling, 30 years old by the time of his first match with Louis, to be on the decline and not a serious challenge for the Brown Bomber.[1]

Perhaps as a result, Louis took training for the Schmeling fight none too seriously. Louis' training retreat was at Lakewood, New Jersey, where Louis was introduced to the game of golf – later to become a lifelong passion. Louis spent significant time on the golf course rather than training.[2][3]"

Schmeling was a smart fighter, and he worked out a good strategy. But Louis was asleep in the head that first fight. He expected a walkover.

Listen I happen to love Wikipedia. I think it is ingenious and is a fantastic resource...But I would caution you about relying upon it as a source in and of itself. This is a perfect example, unless you know the two sources very well. There is plenty wrong with assumptions made by the entrient regarding Louis, golf and Schmeling.

It would take an hour to cite all that is contrary to assumptions here but briefly: Louis lost on a technical fax Pouix. it had nothing to do with his conditioning. Louis was still under the reigns of guys who would not let him overlook the pillsbury dough boy, much less a dangerous fighter like Schmeling. If you read most credible accounts of why Louis lost that fight they all say the same thing:

Schmeling found a bad habit...Those of us who have trained can attest to the fact that unlearning a bad habit takes a lot longer than slowly learning the correct way to do something. Louis was caught off guard because he was so technically sound, but he was dropping his hand when he came back with the right (I believe it was the right). Schmeling saw it on tape and simply followed his arm back and countered. It shut Louis down.

[Ray Corso]

It was the left! Louis would throw the jab (left) and "row" it back!
Max saw the error and counter the jab with a right hand and it landed flush. Louis at that age (22 yrs old) mostly leaned back and down to his right knee to slip punches and Max followed up at that repeated move too.
Max was a very good fighter who was well schooled in boxing and trained in the states once he signed with Jacobs. He has a strong right hand but he was a slow starter and he was caught early two or three times in his career.
He was 53-7 when taking on Louis the first time he had been robbed in the Sharkey fight 3 years early and there were fighters who didn't want to fight him. It could have been certain connections not willing to take the chance with a "foreign" born fighter but either way Max was no easy mark. He dropped a few decisions prior to the first Louis fight but came back against the same men and beat them.
Max was a game fighter and was a talented one also. He was stopped 5 times in 10 loses in a total of 70 pro bouts. At least 3 of his losses were questionable his willingness and heart were never in doubt and the man lived to be 99 years old.

Ray

[Ray Corso]

Louis could struggle with Ali on the move and in prime condition.
Hard to beat Ali in his prime.
Ali via decs.
Frazier is at a disadvantage with his one hand attack against a two fisted power puncher.
Louis via tko late or decs.
Liston would be the best match up, terrific two handed fighters
I like Louis's more compact punching ability but Listons long jab might equalize Louis distance efforts.
Even fight!!! I would pay big to see it!
Foreman would have a shot against anyone because of his power!
Louis is a superior technical fighter and on the inside would be safer than outside but once again George can hurt any man.
George via tko, Louis decs or tko on abrasions/cuts.

Ray

[Joe Beamish]

Listen I happen to love Wikipedia. I think it is ingenious and is a fantastic resource...But I would caution you about relying upon it as a source in and of itself. This is a perfect example, unless you know the two sources very well. There is plenty wrong with assumptions made by the entrient regarding Louis, golf and Schmeling.

It would take an hour to cite all that is contrary to assumptions here but briefly: Louis lost on a technical fax Pouix. it had nothing to do with his conditioning. Louis was still under the reigns of guys who would not let him overlook the pillsbury dough boy, much less a dangerous fighter like Schmeling. If you read most credible accounts of why Louis lost that fight they all say the same thing:

Schmeling found a bad habit...Those of us who have trained can attest to the fact that unlearning a bad habit takes a lot longer than slowly learning the correct way to do something. Louis was caught off guard because he was so technically sound, but he was dropping his hand when he came back with the right (I believe it was the right). Schmeling saw it on tape and simply followed his arm back and countered. It shut Louis down.

Again, the Wiki entry gives two sources arguing that Louis didn't train seriously for the first Schmeling fight. You can investigate those two sources if you like, or dismiss them because they aren't convenient to your argument.

As I said, and as everyone knows, Schmeling found a bad habit in Louis, just as Marquez later found one in Pacquiao, and as Martinez found one in Paul Williams -- and these fighters capitalized handsomely.

However, if you're going to use a single fight to characterize a fighter's entire career, you can do this with a large handful of Ali fights that were less than stellar, in which an opponent found a weakness and capitalized on it. The first Henry Cooper fight, all of the Frazier and Norton fights, and the Jimmy Young fight, for starters.

Go back and look at Loius. His first Schmeling fight was terrible, and the second was a brutal shutdown of the same fighter. Common sense would indicate that something happened to explain such a huge swing in performance for Louis. Experience is a good teacher. And training is a really good idea.

[HipHop]

when it comes down to frazier and louis, i'll choose louis like 80% of the time just based on the fighting style and background. louis was a real power puncher, he could knock dudes out cold with straights, though at the same time he was a technical striker too. not sure about the rest, but if it was frazier vs louis, i'd go with louis.

[billeau2]

Again, the Wiki entry gives two sources arguing that Louis didn't train seriously for the first Schmeling fight. You can investigate those two sources if you like, or dismiss them because they aren't convenient to your argument.

As I said, and as everyone knows, Schmeling found a bad habit in Louis, just as Marquez later found one in Pacquiao, and as Martinez found one in Paul Williams -- and these fighters capitalized handsomely.

However, if you're going to use a single fight to characterize a fighter's entire career, you can do this with a large handful of Ali fights that were less than stellar, in which an opponent found a weakness and capitalized on it. The first Henry Cooper fight, all of the Frazier and Norton fights, and the Jimmy Young fight, for starters.

Go back and look at Loius. His first Schmeling fight was terrible, and the second was a brutal shutdown of the same fighter. Common sense would indicate that something happened to explain such a huge swing in performance for Louis. Experience is a good teacher. And training is a really good idea.

Two sources? Really!! WOW!!!! hold the house down!!!! yes they are not convenient to my argument which is what exactly? More like my cautionary appeal to your apparent lack of reason...but i didn't know that "lack" existed...I get it now, will keep my fingers shut. I never laid out an argument.

Yes a bad habit thats the point, and since when did I characterize any fighter by anything? where are you getting this idea from? On the contrary...actually you are characterizing Louis based on what amounts to heresay...that was my point and if you think two sources means anything your a yenta indeed!

"Common sense would indicate?" How about getting smacked in the face all night by Schmelling could that have affected his performance? would that indicate anything? You don't even need common sense really... But its not logical and will never be logical, that because all of two sources does not amount to much evidence...Could still be true of course, but not based on two sources on wiki.

Reading comprehension here is lacking at times, its annoying. Judging from your response one would think that I made a big statement about louis and his training when in fact all I did was pleasantly offer a caution that while wikileaks is a good middle ground for most topics, as a source in itself it should be questioned. Your conclusion to most reasonable people would be an example of that.

Then I explained that despite your two sources with IQ's of 180 and the ability to levitate, and see the future...most pugs and pug prognosticators felt that Louis' training was not necessarily the issue. Its not even my opinion! History tells us that Schmelling caught Louis all night because of a habit. There might be something more to it as well, better find out and not take the word of Wiki on this one...best to verify.

You come back with some kind of a grand statement. Look I don't even know if what you are saying is true...Maybe your right, but not based on two sources from WikiI can't say it any more simple than that. So please spare me the assumptions about what argument I am making, about what assumptions I have about fighters and characterizing them based on a fight... about technical adjustments and other fighters, and most assuredly about what "everybody knows" as you put it.