So your side wiith Louis in a fight that you only seen half the rounds of where Louis was the worse in the action and floored twice? Yes or No? Even Louis disagrees with you. [url] This content is protected [/url] Wallcot Louis was down in rounds one and four. Louis was so disgusted by his performance that he attempted to leave the ring as soon as the fight ended, but he was restrained by his handlers. A ringside poll of 32 boxing writers had 21 scoring the bout for Walcott, ten scoring it for Louis and one calling it a draw. Newspaper Votes Jim Schlemmer, sporting editor, Akron Beacon Journal (Akron, OH) - Walcott Jesse A. Linthicum, sporting editor, The Sun (Baltimore, MD) - 8-5-2 Walcott (score provided by Associated Press) Jean Rouchard. The Evening Sun (Baltimore, MD) - 8-6-1 Walcott Joe Lee, Brooklyn Eagle (Brooklyn, NY) - 8-7 Louis (score provided by United Press) Tommy Holmes, Brooklyn Eagle (Brooklyn, NY) - Walcott Ralph Frost, Brooklyn Eagle (Brooklyn, NY) - Walcott Tom Ryan, sporting editor, Evening Courier (Camden, NJ) - 12-2-1 Walcott Wilfrid Smith, Chicago Daily Tribube (Chicago, IL) - 8-6-1 Louis (score provided by United Press) James E. Doyle, Cleveland Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH) - 10-4-1 Walcott Gordon Cobbledick, sporting editor, Cleveland Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH) - 7-6-2 Walcott (score provided by Associated Press and United Press) Jack Sharkey, International News Service - Walcott Frank Eck, Associated Press - 9-6 Walcott Elliott Cushing, Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester, NY) - 8-6-1 Walcott Jack Cuddy, United Press - 7-6-2 Walcott Ray Grody, Milwaukee Sentinel (Milwaukee, WI) - 7-6-2 Walcott (score provided by United Press) George A. Barton, Minneapolis Morning Tribune (Minneapolis, MI) - 8-6-1 Walcott Alan Harvey, Canadian Press - 6-5-4 Walcott Gene Ward, Daily News (New York, NY) - 7-6-2 Walcott Joe Trimble, Daily News (New York, NY) - 7-6-2 Louis (score provided by Associated Press and United Press) Al Buck, New York Post (New York, NY) - 8-5-2 Louis. Leonard Cohen, New York Post (New York, NY) - 8-6-1 Walcott Jimmy Cannon, New York Post (New York, NY) - 8 rounds for Walcott Anthony Marenghi, Newark Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ) - 7-6-2 Louis Joe Gootter, Paterson Evening News (Paterson, NJ) - 9-6 Louis Al Abrams, sporting editor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pittsburgh, PA) - 8-6-1 Walcott W. J. McGoogan, St. Louis Post-Dispatch (St. Louis, MO) - 7-7-1 John M. Flynn, sporting editor, The Berkshire Evening Eagle (Pittsfield, MA) - Walcott Clif Keane, The Boston Daily Globe (Boston, MA) - 8-5-2 Louis Bill Cunningham, The Boston Herald (Boston, MA) - 7-6-2 Walcott (score provided by United Press) Sec Taylor, sporting editor, The Des Moines Register (Des Moines, IA) - 8-6-1 Walcott Burton Hawkins, The Evening Star (Washington, DC) - 7-6-2 Walcott Bill Lee, sporting editor, The Hartford Courant (Hartford, CT) - 7-4-4 Walcott Charlie Tiang, sporting editor, The Kingston Daily Freeman (Kingston, NY) - 9-4-2 Walcott Wendell Smith, sporting editor, The Pittsburgh Courier (Pittsburgh, PA) - 7-6-2 Louis James P. Dawson, The New York Times (New York, NY) - 8-7 Louis Joseph C. Nichols, New York Times - 8-7 Louis (score provided by Associated Press and United Press) John Webster, The Philadelphia Inquirer and Public Ledger (Philadelphia, PA) - 11-3-1 Walcott Lawton Carver, sporting editor, International News Service - 7-5-3 Louis Harold W. Heinz, The Springfield Union (Springfield, MA) - 8-5-2 Walcott John McNulty, PM Daily (New York, NY) - 7-6-2 Walcott Tom Meany, sporting editor, PM Daily (New York, NY) - 9-6 Louis (score provided by Associated Press) Nat Fleischer, The Ring (New York, NY) - 8-6-1 Louis Wilbur Wood, sporting editor, New York Sun - 11-4 Walcott Grantland Rice, New York Sun - 11-4 Walcott Lester Bromberg, New York World Telegram - 10-5 Walcott Joe Williams, New York World Telegram - Walcott Max Case, New York Journal-American - Walcott Frank Graham, New York Journal-American - Walcott Lewis Burton, New York Journal-American - Walcott Bill Corum, New York Journal-American - 8-7 Louis Dan Parker, New York Daily Mirror - 9-6 Louis (according to AP) or 8-7 Louis (according to UP) Jim Jennings, New York Daily Mirror - 7-6-2 Louis Jesse Abramson, New York Herald Tribune - 8-7 Louis Red Smith, New York Herald Tribune - 8-7 Louis Ted Meier, Associated Press - 11-3-1 Walcott Hugh S. Fullerton, Associated Press - Walcott. "He scored the harder punches." Murray Rose, Associated Press - 9-5-1 Walcott Ted Smits, Associated Press - Walcott Gayle Talbot, Associated Press - 10-4-1 Walcott Leo H. Peterson, sporting editor, United Press - 7-5-3 Walcott Oscar Fraley, United Press - 7-6-2 Walcott Bob Considine, International News Service - 8-7 Walcott Davis J. Walsh, International News Service - 8-3-4 Walcott Harry Grayson, Newspaper Enterprise Association - 8-4-3 Walcott John Lardner, North American Newspaper Alliance - Louis John Carmichael, sporting editor, Chicago Daily News - 11-4 Walcott (according to AP) or 8-4-3 Walcott (according to UP) Gene Kessler, Chicago Times - 7-6-2 Walcott Clair Kelley, Chicago Herald-American - 9-3-3 Walcott Jack Conway, Boston American - Louis Gerry Hern, Boston Post - 7-7-1 (according to AP and Al Buck of NY Post) or 7-6-2 Walcott (according to UP) Ed Delaney, Philadelphia Daily News - Walcott Matt Ring, Philadelphia Evening Bulletin - 8-7 Walcott Whitey Lewis, Cleveland News - 8-7 Walcott Franklin Lewis, Cleveland Press - Walcott Shirley Povich, Washington Post - Walcott Bob Addie, Washinton Times-Herald - 9-3-3 Walcott Hank O'Donnell, Waterbury Republican - 12-2-1 Walcott George Edmond, St. Paul Pioneer Press - 8-5-2 Louis Bill Demuth, Wheeling Intelligencer - 8-5-2 Walcott Robert Bre, La Presse (Paris, France) - 7-5-3 Louis Jean Kroutchtain, AFP (French News Agency) - 7-5-3 Walcott Bob Murphy, Detroit Evening Times, 8-5-2 Walcott
It's very very like you to make this a discussion about "sides". What I am interested in is what really happened. What happened was, Louis was the aggressor and the champion. According to the New York Times and RING Magazine, both of whom scored the fight for Louis, both of who stressed that Louis landed more punches. You are obsessed with punch stats, it is pretty much the case that you score your fights using punchstats - here you seem very keen to ignore testimony that Louis landed more punches. So Louis was the champion; Louis was the aggressor; Louis may have landed more punches in the course of the fifteen rounds. How is it, that, to you, it is absolutely impossible the decision was reasonable? Because you behave, having never, ever seen the fight, like it is is a stone cold robbery. You behave, having personally scored the highlights quite close, that no possible reasonable case can be made for Louis to have won the fight. Disagrees with me about what? Yes, I've already covered this: " Nor did around 2/3 pressmen who were ringside. However, it's not so straight ahead. Two judges scored for Joe Louis, and so did 1/3 newsmen." This is actually inaccurate though; what I should have said was that a third of judges didn't score it for Walcott, because that single draw counts otherwise. So do the judges scores. 22-13 then are the generally held scores from ringside allowing newspapermen reported by Boxrec and the judges. This is nowhere near robbery territory. It just isn't, however desperately you want it to be. Pacquiao-Bradly I is a robbery we have on film and the split there is much closer to 90/10. There are more than a dozen professionals at ringside who scored it for Joe Louis, champion (or draw). Why do you get so hysterical about it?
In his autobiography Joe Louis My Life,Louis was in no doubt he won the fight,and he reiterated that on national TV. [url]Louis and Walcott on "The Way it Was." Part 1. - YouTube[/url] I think that's pretty conclusive. John Lardner Bill Corum Red Smith James P Dawson Al Buck Dan Parker Nat Fleischer Jesse Abramson Were all heavy hitters as far as boxing reporting was concerned,the fact that they voted for Louis leads me to believe it was a pretty close fight that could have gone either way. Fights that close are never robberies,imo.
Walcott won the fight, but forgot to win the belt. Those were the times of a singular champion and Louis was the captain America personified. He should have pressed the 14th and 15th hard. Granted, politics aside, I consider the fight a great, great achievement on Walcott's resume.
Apparently Mendoza has moved on from his racist crusade to diminish Jack Johnson's legacy and now hes on to Joe Louis, another icon. What a small little man.
This,, I read the same thing where Louis apologized after the fight, he knew he'd lost and had the class to admit it to Walcott.
Watch the footage I provided, Louis was convinced he had won, and said so in his book, and on national TV.
I take David Icke more seriously, and he once said live on British tv that the Queen Mother was a lizard.
Essentially, yeah. If you forcefully believe a fight you've never seen was a robbery, you better have a better ratio of ringsiders than 3-1. If a reasonable card can be found, no robbery exists. More than that though,many of the folks who have it for Walcott have it close: Leo H. Peterson, sporting editor, United Press - 7-5-3 Walcott Oscar Fraley, United Press - 7-6-2 Walcott Bob Considine, International News Service - 8-7 Walcott Cards like these from the Boxrec listing that's been copied here for the thousandth time have it a very close fight. There were about ten guys at ringside who had Walcott a clear winner and 3 or 4 who had Louis a clear winner.
Yeah, he did, he said "Sorry Joe" according to Walcott in the ring. I'm not sure why this was but if I had to guess, he knew he'd got away with one and that he could have lost his title. But, the same people who post and re-post this apology ignore him saying he thought he'd won right after the fight, and then consistently saying he thought he'd won the fight for the rest of his life. Similarly, the people who don't like the fact that Louis may have got lucky tend to harp on the clarity he had about his victory and brush over his apology. These lighting-rod issues are weird and tiresome - it's essentially been the same copy-and-paste job for about 20 years now.
It's very likely Walcott deserved the nod but no one alive is in a position to state that with any certainty.As you said it's the same circular argument made ad nauseum over and over ,similar to who deserved the win O Brien or Johnson,in a 6 rounds no decision fight? Or Hart V Johnson,where the fight was awarded on the basis of aggression and possibly colour prejudie ? Both fights can be talked about and will be as long as boxing survives. O Brien, being much the smaller man may claim a moral victory.and possibly Hart's willingness to make the fight earned him the win ,but we will never know. Personally I don't suscribe to the long held view that you have to "take the title from the champ",Louis believed this and Marvin Hagler bitterly cited that, as he" was making the fight," he should have retained his crown against Leonard. If you score more points you should get the nod, referees are supposed to be judging ,not champions or personalities but two corners, ,red and blue.Human nature being what it is impartiality is sometimes discarded. When Louis was announced as the winner many in the crowd booed, but Walcott was not expected to put up such a strong fight, and sympathy for the underdog naturally came to the fore when he did so well. "I read where you thought I lost the fight,well mebbe you was right,and mebbe you was wrong,but there won't be no argument about the rematch"Louis
Hagler claimed Leonard told him "you beat me, man" straight after their fight. Leonard has always denied it and always claimed he won the fight. Adding some credence to his words is that he is on record publically at least three times now telling the world that he lost to Hearns. But i digress. Louis claimed he said that to all the opponents he beat years later. He may or may not have been a touch tongue in cheek.
Who the heck is Daivd Icke, some crazy British man I presume? Consider the source. I don't take you seriously either. The debate has reached a point where words don't fly, so you making it personal. I'll pass. Do yourself and the board a favor and skip my posts.