Ezzard Charles & Jersey Joe Walcott - can they make HW TOP 10?

I love how he includes norton in there. Classic Revolver move.

Janitor, are you now convinced?

p4p, but not at heavyweight

Charles never rematched Louis so we dont know what would have happened there. Its safe to say Walcott fought a much better version of Joe Louis than Ezzard Charles did.

Well Charles lost to Harold Johnson, Walcott knocked out Johnson.

Who said he lost to Maxim? The New York times reported "Clevelander won an Unpopular Decision" and AP had Walcott winning. Walcott also TWICE avenged the controversial loss with wins over Maxim.

 

Theoretically you could make a case for either to be ranked above Foreman, Frazier, Dempsey, Jeffries, Holyfield, Patterson, Liston based on quality and quantity of wins but its a bit sketchy and you'd be stretching.

If you really wanted to push your case you could argue prime Walcott and Charles would have beaten Marciano, given they were past prime when they fought and still made it very close. You could also argue Charles would always have beaten Joe Louis. Maybe someone should make an alias ranking Charles and Walcott above Joe Louis, Marciano, Foreman, Frazier, Dempsey, Jeffries, Holyfield, Patterson, Liston and rank them above Johnson and Tyson for good measure

 

Well, i know people will probably diss this, but this is off the top of my head. A Top 16.

1.Ali (Best CV, faced and beat more big punchers and ranked contenders than any heavyweight Champ outside of Lewis. Fought in the best era of Heavyweights 1964-1978). He is probably the best known fighter in history.
2. Louis (longest reigning Heavyweight Champ, was the greatest of all time before Ali and destroyed nearly every guy he faced while Undisputed Champion).
3.Holmes (Holmes whatever you say was linear Champ for 7 years, yes his era was weaker than Ali's but skills wise, who today tops him?)
4.Johnson (No Heavyweight had Johnson's cute, trickery and craftiness ability pre Johnson or post Johnson until the Jersey Joe Walcott).
5.Jeffries (Probably known as the greatest Heavyweight Champion in history pre johnson).
6.Dempsey (Dempsey style is comparable to Tyson, he was an innovator and a huge star)
7.Marciano (Probably no Heavyweight put as much effort behind every blow. A gym rat).
8.Lewis (One of the greatest Heavyweights in the last twenty years).
9.Foreman (Head to head beats many)
10.Frazier (Joe is top ten)
11.Holyfield (based on accomplishments who can argue).
12. Tyson (based upon his demolitions 1986-1990)
13. Charles (he did beat a prime Walcott twice before losing while on the decline, the first guy to go 15 rounds with Rock).
14. John L. Sullivan (You can't forget Sullivan, the first gloved Heavyweight Champ and first big star).
15. Jim Corbett (A early forefather of scientific skill in the game).
16.Jersey Joe Walcott (In terms of skills, not many can compete with Joe).

 

No way for top ten. Not top 15 either for me. Top 20-30.

The bottom line is bother guys were small, lack top end durability, top end power, and lost some fights to lesser talents. Charles was really a light heavyweight, so in a sense being ranked in the top 30 at heavyweight is an achievement for him.

 

We are not too far apart here M,probably around 20 for me. Joe Louis said that in his prime he thought he would have stopped Charles in about 8rds.

 

So? I could say I'd knock out Sam Langford in 30 seconds, doesn't make it true.

 

SO!
I could say I would knock you out inside 1 round and it would be true.









How dare you question me?


:shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:

As Louis fought 8 heavyweight Champions ,maybe his opinion was worth something?:good

 

The first fight with Maxim fought with Walcott was exciting and close, but Maxim came out on top. The second fight Walcott won not on account of what he did but on account of Maxim refusing to engage Walcott in some of the rounds. The audience often booed Maxim for this. The typical description of the fight is "sluggish," which was not a reference to slugging. Maxim still managed to make it close and the result was a majority decision for Walcott. It doesn't say much for a fighter when his opponent can almost win without really trying. The third fight was a split decision. In none of their fights can Walcott be said to have dominated the light heavyweight. So what I said earlier is correct and relevant.

Walcott did not knock out Harold Johnson. Johnson fell to the floor without being hit. As the New York Times reports, "Johnson had been battling Walcott on even terms when at 1:03 of the third round he fell to the canvas and rolled over and over writing in pain." The Pennsylvania State Athletic Commission physician announced that Johnson was suffering from an injury of the intervertebral disc located in the small of Johnson's back. It had nothing to do with Walcott. The injury put Johnson out of commission for almost an entire year.

I guess I can understand why a fan of Walcott would try to spin his performances against Joey Maxim, but I don't know why anybody would claim Walcott knocked out Johnson when even boxrec clearly states the facts of the case and thus anybody can know the basic truth of the claim. It's insulting to the intelligence of the members of this list.

Walcott was not a top 20 heavyweight.

 

I guess he must have been in a coma since is last incarnation or perhaps in aprison with no internet facilities.

 

Classic Revolver Bull****....

Jersey Joe Walcott deserves all the credit for knocking out johnson. Harold did not hurt his back until walcott knocked him down in the 2nd round, johnson doesnt get hurt if walcott doesnt land hard punches knocking him down. Walcott knocked Harold Johnson down in the 2nd round, johnson fell down and hurt his back upon the knockdown. Then walcott had johnson dazed and reeling around the ring in the 3rd. I talked to an old timer historian "Albinored" who was around during 1950 and he claimed walcott knocked out harold johnson clean and legitley. Old Fogey also cleared up this issue months ago and found out johnson hurt his back due to walcott knocking him down.


"Jersey Joe Walcott knocked out Manyunk's Harold Johnson on this day in 1950 at the Philadelphia Arena. The strange ending to the fight came in the third round. After looking good and out-boxing Jersey Joe at the beginning of the bout, Johnson was knocked down at the end of the second round by some hard shots. He was able to continue for the next round, but eventually toppled as he pursued Walcott, seemingly still dizzy from the knockdown." - Philadelphia report


Seems Mr. Marvel aka Revolver is in denial johnson was knocked down in the 2nd round

 

No, the papers reported it was a "Very unpopular decision".

 

So Charles gets credit for beating a prime Walcott when he beat Jersey Joe walcott was 36, yet marciano doesnt get full credit for beating a 38 year old walcott? when was walcotts prime then? Charles certainly never beat walcott of the louis fights.


Both fought eachother at/near primes and both came out 2-2....Charles was very much in his prime on a career best winning streak in 1951 when walcott knocked him out

 

SQ, won't you agree that there's very little between Walcott and Charles' resumes @ HW?

They went 2-2 head to head (arguably 3-1 for Charles), both gave Marciano a tough fight but couldn't beat him. Walcott probably beat Louis the first time, but lost the second; Charles beat Louis convincingly, but that was probably the worst version of Louis ever.

 

Yes, but there is more to the picture that I explained on the first page. First of all, 2-2 is even and I think a Knockout and decision victory holds more weight than just two decision victories. I think Walcotts resume is slightly better. Lee Q Murray and Harold Johnson are both top 50 heavyweights of all time on my book, and walcott beat these guys while charles did not. Also Walcott beat Versions of Elmer Ray and Jimmy Bivins that were coming off career best winning streaks while charles beat leftover versions. I also think Walcott beat a younger and much better joe louis in 1947. I also think Walcotts heavyweight run 1945-1947 where he cleaned out the division is better than any run charles put on at heavyweight. I think Walcott beat bigger punchers, better prime heavyweights, and performed better against bigger opponents.