how in the world did abe simon.....

Barlund had lost his last fight to lhvy Melio Bettina

Bettina had won 2 of his last 4 fights, losing to a lhvy and a middleweight.
I posted the weight of Walcott against Simon[192lbs,] in response to a poster saying he had read he weighed 180lbs for the fight.

 

At world level, you undoubtedly do.

 

According to local news reports Walcott had been sparring for at least two weeks and was doing regular roadwork coming into the fight. Weights I find are 192 for Walcott (or Wolcott) and 256 for Simon. "A terrific right to the mouth" ended things for Simon who was trailing. Joe didn't stir for quite a while.

 

Most people do more than that for a WCB fight.

It's like this.

You either accept that Walcott was a semi professional fighter back then, or you accept:

That the late 1930s, were a vastly stronger era than the late 40s/early 50s.

That Abe Simon was of a similar calibre to Elmer ray and Rex Layne at least, and so were tiger Jack Fox, and perhaps Roy Lazer.

The only alternative, would be that Walcott improved beyond recognition, during his period of war time inactivity!

 

You like to draw forks in the road of illogic. I was merely relaying a few details from some articles i was able to find. Walcott's manager further said that Joe's relative inactivity was due to an inability to find good fights and not for lack of trying or being prepared.

 

It's likely a combination of Walcott not highly active and Simon catching him .. Simon was a huge guy .. I am also from the school that feels that Walcott was not as great as some make him out to be .. if you think about it he is known far more for his losses than his one win of real merrit vs Charles .. Walcott was an inconsistent fighter , capable of big performances but not unbeatable ..

 

I just feel that we have to be clear about what was happening here.

Do we agree that this was nothing like say, Elmer Ray's win over Walcott?

 

Fighting once a month is pretty active. I agree to some extent with the rest of your post.

 

There is an important difference between a fighter being inconsistent, and just not as good as the best fighter in the division.

Yes Walcott lost to Louis, Charles, and Marciano, but he practically cleaned out the division under them!

If Charles had held him off a third time, he would have been something of a standout, among fighters who never held the title!

 

Losing to Layne was not impressive .. lasting to Maxim the same .. not for great heavyweights ..

 

Yes I'm afraid you cant drop the ball like that and be called great.

 

Yes, I agree with you.

Once Walcott got some backing he was able to do himself justice. Even fighting regular without good management a fighter can not obtain the right fights. Not many understand that the very best fighters of all time really could have 50-50 records with bad management.

 

No, it wasn't.

Was it worse on paper, than Foreman losing to Young?

 

Or Lewis vs mcall?

Morrison vs Bentt?

 

Was there a heatwave in NY that November when Joe lost to Layne ,and Ray?

Young was the number 3 contender, having beaten no 5 Lyle in his last fight, Maxim was unranked.
I would pick Young to beat Maxim and Layne.