Mickey Walker v Gerald McClellan

One fighter is 5 inches shorter, 10 inches less of reach, and quite likely 10-20 lbs lighter going into the ring....but I guess that only matters in your SHW threads

 

1 fighter is routinely based in the top 10 pd for pound fighters of all time. The other lost by ko to Nigel Benn!
Nowadays for some ignorant reason, Walker is given little respect and is basically ignored. For the 90 years before that though, his greatness was passed down generation to generation. He is one of the cornerstones of the sport.

 

I pick the legendary P4P great who KOd heavyweights AND looks very solid on film, alongside an ATG resume.

I'm surprised the Bulldog is so overlooked here. He went 15 rounds with Jack Sharkey after starting as a Welter, gave Harry Greb his hardest fight, yet McClennan would KO him?

 

Good Scrap, I think the conditioning (I assume this is over 12), power and Explosivness of McClellan gets the better of him with a KO. But that being said Walker could maybe take a McClellan shot and possibly win a decision.

 

I find it funny people trying to downgrade Gerald by saying how he lost to Benn. First of all, that fight should've never gotten passed Rd 1, and Gerald should've won right then and there. Further, even if you brush over that part of the equation, you are then left with a disgusting display of fouling that clearly impacted the outcome of the fight. Benn, again, should've been disqualified for that, a Gerald awarded the victory. Even if you brush over that, those punches clearly had a profound effect on Gerald that should've never been allowed (or in that quantity), so who knows what happens without that. Do you still believe Benn wins? I don't, he gets taken out. So using Gerald losing to Benn as any a reason for picking against him makes little sense to me.

 

Agree 100% with most of what you say here. His resume is lacking talent and certainly depth. I agree with your sentiments. I agree Benn was one of the big fights he did have, and I thus carries some weight because other parts are lacking. Still though, we should view the fight as it was and for what it was, and to me, it wasn't something I would look to showcase how Gerald couldn't get it done against the big names.

 

If a fighter from the 20's we had little footage of, had an equivelent resume to McClellan, but had glowing accounts, I doubt anyone would pick him.

In terms of accomplishment, to call it a gulf between these two is an understatement.

And when Walker took punches from heavyweights, the idea of him not being able to handle McClellan's power seem pretty questionable, I doubt he hits as hard as Schmeling. And Walker also fought plenty of fights with a similar reach disadvantage. From the footage too, I think Walker gives him hell, I think he looks well capable of dealing with the height and reach.

 

Pretty damn good analysis. I think McClellan has a good chance of winning still though, just based on power and conditioning

 

That might be a compelling argument if Walker had been able to handle Schmeling's power. But he couldn't. The Schmeling fight was a terrible mismatch. Schmeling manhandled Walker. Knocked him down multiple times and left him a blind, bruised, bloody mess. Some writers felt that Walker was fortunate to make it out of the first round. And that was Schmeling's only win in 4 fights over an almost 3-year period, by the way. I don't understand how this performance undermines the case for McClellan.

 

And what about Sharkey, then?

Sharkey had 29 - 30lbs over Walker.

Walker also beat and knocked down Johnny Risko, who had 30lbs on him.

 

The Sharkey fight would probably make for a better argument than the Schmeling fight. But from what I've read, it sounds like a post-prime Sharkey gave a confusing performance and seemed to just go through the motions for most of the fight (in part because he apparently broke his hand in the first round, maybe). And while I hate to rely too heavily on the writeups, it sounds like everyone agrees that it was a case of Sharkey fighting too deliberately more so than Walker forcing him to fight a bad fight. But who knows? Either way, Walker deserves much respect for fighting on even terms with a class fighter so much bigger than him.

68-46-6 Johnny Risko lost to a bunch of men he outweighed. Was he more skilled or a better puncher than McClellan?

It's all speculative, but I think that if little Mickey and his big fighting heart tried to rush McClellan with his trademark lead hooks, he'd probably end up eating some very hard rights. The kind that you can't just shake off. Not to take away anything from Walker and his greatness or his moxy but that seems the most likely outcome to me.

 

Last I checked, Sharkey wasn't a murderous puncher anyways. So I'm not sure why surviving a meh Sharkey is impressive from a chin point of view.

 

Uh, we're talking about a former Welterweight against a heavyweight.