He lost to Johnny Allen (11-15 record) in 1945, didn’t he? Or was it ‘46? To me, ‘avenging a loss’ means you split with someone as if the loss doesn’t count … and it does count. As do his other 19 losses. Also split with Elmer Ray and Joey Maxim — fine fighters, but not ATG heavies. Splitting with some other top guys =/= cleaning out a division to me. Of course actual mileage may vary and you may consider splitting a series (1-1 or 2-1) to be a cleaning. He lost six times between1945 and 1949. That, to me, is not dominance.
From 1945 until challenging Louis in 1947 Walcott had seven wins against men ranked within that time frame. That's seven wins in two years over contenders, you can count on one hand the amount of heavyweights who have done that. I don't think Walcott has to necessarily beat the champion to clear the division but even if you use that metric, he may very well have given how close the first fight with Louis was. I agree that Ali beats Walcott, that's not even the initial cause of the argument.
He was champ for 11 years, of course he would retire at the beheast of his mother. That doesn't mean he was shot. Equating 1948 Louis to the 1950-52 version is disengenuous. The Louis who fought Walcott was much closer to the one who fought Mauriello and Conn. The footage alone proves the massive gulf between the pre and post comeback versions. You tell me I perform mental gymnastiques to elevate Walcott while nitpicking and whining about his competition. Calling an era weak is such a low form of criticism, you can grab any fighter from any era and make find flaws in his opponents. You called Ezzard Charles some light heavy, as if he isn't the very best light heavyweight of the last 150 years. The fact of the matter is that Walcott's match making was unlike anybody else's. Most guys get a shot at the champ after a couple of ranked wins, Walcott had seven in two years before Louis fought him. Professional fighters don't even fight as many contenders within the time frame Walcott did, let alone journeymen.
My defitioning of "clearing the division" is you beat all the top guys and are clearly the best Heavyweight in the world. And well....Walcott lost to an aging Louis and lost to Marciano which means he never cleared the division IMO because he was never the best Heavyweight in the world at any point in his career. Walcott split fights with Elmer Ray, Joey Maxim, and lost to Rex Layne. You can't be that inconsistent and then claim he cleared the division especially when he went 0-4 against an aging Louis and Marciano aswell.
I read that in one of my boxing mags from about 1982 and still haven't forgotten it. You've got me trying to rememebr who it was aimed at hahahahahaha It may have been Frank Fletcher at a guess. He was a middleweight face first brawler with tons of heart who was in some of the most action packed bouts you will N-ever see, as you don't watch fights under heavyweight Sorry mate!!!!!! hahaha
Ali had the faster feet and hands, but Walcott had good footwork and hit hard with both hands especially the left hook and was crafty and sneaky with the right. If I had to bet, it would be Ali by close decision, but Walcott could pull a Cooper hook or the sneaky hookupcut that he KO'd Charles with. Not an easy fight for Ali and Walcott would be prepared so it would be a dangerous fight. Could Walcott catch Ali and drop him? Yes, Could Walcott get the nod? Yes, Could Ali get a tko stop like he did vs Lyle? possibly but more than likely both men would be in top form and if so - Ali wins a close fight with some scares for both men.
Ali was sleeping with two prostitutes in the back room before the Norton fight. He didn’t take him seriously. Norton happened to have a style that annoyed Ali and Holmes. Otherwise his career is pretty mediocre. as far as the opps question Ali by points or KO. But Walcott gives a good showing. Ali had a way of making abusing good smaller good boxers. He still had enough in Zaire to win a comfortable decision.
Mike Tyson got his deek sucked minutes before leaving the dressing room to annihilate Spinks. A man does what a man gotta do.
Any version of Ali in shape and focused prior to 1976 , beat any version of Walcott at any stage of his career. Yes it really IS that simple in my opinion....
Wow. someone in Mike’s team really went above and beyond the call of duty. No wonder Mike’s career went awry when he parted ways with his head trainer.
Zaire Ali was a specifically trained and applied fighter. Broadening Ali’s scope and realised potentials out to the preceding Norton and Frazier rematches, Ali displayed his signature prep and adaptability to the opponent at hand. I imagine the same custom built and applied Ali in the face of Joe Walcott with Ali securing a stoppage at around the 2/3 mark of a prescheduled 15 rounder. Ali’s “prime”’ during his second career was arguably reached and maintained from and including the Norton rematch through to and including his victory over Foreman.