Marciano-Walcott II: What exactly happened?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHxX...2AC968019&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=6

 

We need Suzie to come in here and randomly cite Vitali Klitschko as the root of all boxing evil to take the heat off of Walcott.

 

i hate to think that a legend like walcott would get disheartened and give a less than 100% effort but that's what it sure looks like

 

Don't have the source or a link at the moment, but read in an interview with a reflecting older Walcott where he said he was buzzed and couldn't follow the count; "blacking out" as he put it. The ref confirmed he got tagged with a good right after Marciano feinted with the left. Yes, probably Rocky's best performance for such a short fight.

 

Rocky butts him under the chin with his head at 2:48

 

Heart like much else can fall away with ring wear.

I fighter who puts forward heroic efforts over a long period can burn him self out mentaly.

Walcott lacked social security for most of his boxing career and that drove him on to superhuman efforts. The second Marciano fight was probably the first one he went into with his future secure.

 

Walcott was indeed age 39 in '53, but his body was toned and hard... Walcott came to fight in the rematch.... But he just got caught early and was dumped on his ass from a sneaky right uppercut from The Rocker...... Again, Walcott had his wit and senses intact while down, but was stunned...... All in all, he was slow upon rising..... Had the referee been a bit more yielding with the count, Walcott would've been forced to continue..... How long would Walcott have lasted, who knows???
:huh

MR.BILL

 

an interesting, and likely accurate, take on walcott

 

Janitor,

I hear that about wear and tear, but Walcott appeared to be the freshest 38 year old fighter I had ever seen when I review the '52 fight tape with Marciano...... And, since Walcott was clearly way ahead in the scoring going into the fateful 13th round, it indicates that Walcott was not taking a real serious licking, regardless of his swollen eyeball / lid..... Walcott was in full control............. Marciano HAD TO make something happen in order to win......

So, point being, I really don't think Walcott was shot in 1953 at age 39..... He could've carried on after his fiasco KO loss to Marciano in 1953 and fought some good fights...... However, most fighters were told or advised to hang-up the gloves and find another line of work when aged 35 to 40 back then.......... Their have only been a handful of guys like "Robinson, Moore & Foreman."

MR.BILL:heyrasta

 

If you want to see some godly like footwork, check out 1:55-2:00 of that video :shock:

 

:adminmy first thought was, there's no way that's real!! wow, i had to watch it twice. damn jersey joe, you got some moves!!

 

You sure about that?? Point wise, Walcott was in the lead. But still for 12 rounds, they both beat each other up pretty baddly.

Walcott's eye was closeing, and had many or Rocky's power shots for about 11 rounds, were Rocky was getting jagged, but when he landed, he did hurt Walcott.

Rounds 1, 7,8,9, 11, and 12 went to Walcott imo.
Rocky took rounds 2, 3, 4, 6, and ten.

Over all a close fight.

 

6-5-1 is certainly a favorable score to Marciano. Maybe comparable to scoring the Ali - Frazier II fight very close.

 

"Ali-Frazier 2" was not close at all........ Sure, it 'twas a boring fight that was tactical, but not close........ Ali won 8 to 4 over 12 rds against Frazier in '74..... Frazier can whine all he wants, but he was out-boxed soundly by Ali.....
:bbb

MR.BILL

 

I didnt score the 5th round. I cant score it, because well only a mere clip made it it seems.

I cant score a 3 scond clip of a round. Sorry. So I didnt have it a draw.

7-5 or 6-5 either way was a close fight.

I think in the patter of the fight when Rocky took over after the knockdown, Rocky might have nab that 5th round, but thats only scoring it by the flow of the fight, before Walcott makes his comeback with a blinded Rocky.