So lame. Everyone knows of Walcotts plight for the bulk of his career. Most of his losses were due to working a full time job to support a family of eight. No time to train or the means to eat/eat properly. Sick boy that Seamust.
What the **** is this superhero bull**** being attributed to Jones? You're acting like nobody managed to lay a glove on him, this is stupid. Uh, no, Marciano knew when to retire.
this is a good fight, that I'd love to see, both about 190lbs and very different skills & dominance, to a point, my heart suggest the Rock would where him down and Out... but, you never know.
they said the same about Charles and Lloyd Marshall, now we know that 'some' Sports Writers can be, were and often are a part of the Business of the Boxing machine...
I'm surprised this is a debate at all. Rocky quite literally only needs to land one single shot to brutally knock out Roy. Roy 175lbs and up is massively overrated. Just remember that he was knocked down by a single shot by DeValle and was majorly troubled by the crouching style of Griffin (the left hook Griffin landed in round 3 of their first bout would brutalise Roy if it were from Rocky, for reference). Rocky brings that but with higher work rate, higher power and a better chin. He would also be less respectful and have no problem fouling, lets be real. Rocky will at some point get Roy on the ropes (where he was ****ing terrible, by far the weakest point of his style bar none to the point where the comparison of him center ring vs him on the ropes is laughable) and spark him brutally. Simple as. Some people think Roy can avoid every single shot, over the entire distance, from one of the highest activity rate power punchers ever, like he was some kind of god Just laughable bias in all honesty.
My argument, that even during Walcott's supposed arc, there was a strong argument he lost the HW title in the fight before he did lose it, many thought Charles won the 4th fight. Walcott lost to Charles 2 times before that also. He also officially lost to Layne before he won the title. So on that basis Walcott is 1-3 coming into the Marciano fight (officially 2-2). I'm not sure if there's an argument that Walcott maybe beat Layne, which change If you think the near best version of Jones loses to men that aren't bigger like past prime Charles and Layne, I think we live in different universes where the laws of physics are somehow broken in your universe.
Pretty much no one did lay a glove on Jones until he was 35. You're laughing at Jones having better stamina but Jones is sprinting all fight where as the Marciano is walking all fight. You're right Marciano knew when to retire and avoid fights he'd lose, that's fair enough. Patterson would of made a fool of him and stopped him
Walcott was a middle/super middle at 25. I'd say he peak was from 1945-1951,and he was born in1914,and even when peak he was prone to drop decisions.