Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
I don't think his era was that good to be honest, the skilled guys like Conn and Schmelling were small (and old), the big guys were poor. Walcott being the exceptional stand out. If the Klits were beating these type of guys everyone would be talking about what a poor era it is
Firstly, there is no such thing as a weak era. You don't dominate in any era, without being incredible.
It is interesting that you not Walcott as an exceptional standout. During his own career, few would have compared him to Schmeling or Baer.
Of course if you are right, then Louis beat him twice while he was on the verge of retirment.