Walcott and Charles, a resume comparison

Question.... wouldn't you say it's likely could've won the title on his first attempt? That very relevant fact seems to get lost when you say... it took him 5 tries to do it, when really, it's likely it should've only taken him one time. You don't think he became most consistent after getting better management and promoters? Seems he mostly certainly did, and became more consistent.

 

Nothing miraculous about simply gaining the finacial support necessary to motivate one to fully dedicate themselves and further develop their skills and talents. Its shocking something so simple that can be applied outside of boxing and into ones everyday life is beyond your comprehension.

Your argument is that from 44 to 54 the entire HW division suddenly sunk below the level of Tiger Jack Fox. That is absurd.

 

Reminds me of a thread from over 10 years ago...
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/james-toney-vs-jersey-joe-walcott.39546/page-2

 

Walcott is hardly the first hardluck story in the division's history. Plenty of guys held down jobs, or worse yet had to fight multiple times a month to pay the bills and incurred chronic injuries. The guy turned pro at 16. I find it hard to believe that he made some great leap in talent and skill 15-17 years into this career and then reached his pinnacle 21 years along. Trajectories in athletics, boxing included, just don't work like that.

 

I never said Walcott was the first fighter to suffer these things. I would certainly agree his case was hardly unique to the era. What are you trying to argue with this Strawman?

Walcott was inactive for roughly 7 to 8 years from 30 to 44. Its incredibly dishonest to call this a 15 to 21 year period of activity. Prior to his 44 run, you are only looking at the 35 to 40 run where he had consistent activity.

Greater dedication yields greater results in all things.

These trajectories are common in Walcott's era. Two of his peers (Moore and Charles) come to mind.

And again, your entire argument is that the entire HW division (only the heavies?) suddenly dropped a tier below Tiger Jack Fox is absurd.

 

Was Jordan better at 23 than he was at 30? Was Lebron better at 23 than he was 30? Was Jerry Rice better at 23 than 30? Even when you're not at your physical zenith, doesn't mean you're not better overall than you were when you were younger. The above are men who had all the best resources and management at their disposal to improve at their trade, but still needed their mental IQ and experience to get better. Walcott didn't have those same resources and management even when he was at his physical prime, so why wouldn't it stand to reason that, when he got it, he would show improvement?

 

But Walcott was 30 in 1944. Are you going to tell me that Walcott was leagues better in 1951? I'm not buying it and his contemporaries weren't buying it either. As Klompton stated above, Walcott was a journeyman in the truest sense, a guy skilled enough to box professionally, sometimes translating at a high rate and sometimes not. A great sparring partner type who could occasionally find the right night and right matchup.

 

My thoughts are line with the thinking of the times by those who followed Walcott and the division first hand. Should I quote another dozen articles? I'm not even being very selective. I could drop a page of quotes.

 

The point still stands on its merits though. Those men were better at 30 than they were at 23. Even though, at 23, they had all the management and resources to get better at their disposal. Yet, they still improved. Walcott never had those same resources early on, so when he got them, his skills and training would no doubt improve correct? However, maybe he was lacking the mental part to all match where his skills were now heading. That also takes time, just like it did with Jordan and James. Once he was getting more refined with more skills, your mental game now needs to adapt to your new found knowledge and skills through experience. They go hand in hand, and takes time to bring things full circle, Walcott just got a later start than most and so he was older when this all game together. Nobody is saying he was in his physical prime then, but it all came together for him later than it does most fighters who having better management early on imo.

 

He beat 4 hall of fame fighters. 5 if you give him the first Louis fight. 6. if the Marciano fight was only 12 rounds. Hardly a journeyman.

 

Sorry, not buying it. Boxing is just too hard, too taxing and too hurtful. No amount of magical trickery is going counteract the debilitation of Father Time. You can pull that act ONLY if you keep the opposition quality low. And if the fluctuations of talent level in the division give you a good hand, then you have your low level of quality.

And, Hey, I am not saying anything original. The vast majority of commentators at the time said THE SAME THING.

 

Put better than I could... and by one who was there...

"The fact that Walcott at (probably) 40-plus is the current champion is an eloquent commentary on the sad plight of the heavyweight class today, but it isn't as eloquent as the fact that Marciano is the leading and virtually only contender. Walcott is a competent journeyman pugilist who learned his trade the hard way and practices it with credit to himself... but he is an incredibly old man as prize fighters go and was never more than a good club fighter when he was young."

Sept 10, 1952, Cleveland Plains Dealer

 

But he didnt win it on his first try. Or his second. Or his third. Or his fourth. There were plenty of people who didnt think Walcott did enough to take the title from Louis so I see no reason to give him more credit than hes due for ALMOST winning the title. Walcott is like a lot of guys from his era that people now have this overinflated opinion of (The so-called Murderers Row is a perfect example) of guys who were good fighters but not miraculously suddenly got more consistent during and after WWII when the sport essentially lost a generation of talent. Walcott was a likeable guy and so he had people rooting for him but the people who had been observing his career made clear note that it wasnt that he had improved but that the division was so weak he was able to finally stand out.