Joe Louis v Jersey Joe Walcott 1

It seem pretty close in that 20 or 30 min highlight format.

Of couse if a complete full round fight is out there, it might tell the whole story.

 

I saw the whole fight. In my opinion, in order to accurately and fairly judge the decision, you have to bear in mind the times. In those days, if you wanted to take the heavyweight champion's title away from him, you had to knock him out, or at least beat him convincingly to get a decision win. Also, you have to note that this fight was scored on a rounds basis. Jersey Joe was definitely ahead after the 13th, but slowed considerably in the 14th and 15th, allowing Joe Louis to press ahead and keep his belt. Whether Jersey Joe tired, or thought he was comfortably ahead and didn't want to take any chances, I guess we will never know for sure. The fact remains that Louis did more in the 14th and 15th, in my opinion, and kept his belt.

Scoring the fight a draw would not have been a bad decision, but then Louis would have retained his belt anyway.

 

The TWO knockdowns that Walcott scored were big in my eyes........ Walcott boxed like a master in '47........ Joe Louis was lucky he had friends in the arena on that night.....

MR.BILL

 

Emphasis mine...

If Walcott would have won the rounds anyway, knockdowns did not help Jersey Joe, since the fight was scored using the rounds system. If the fight had been scored using a 10 point must system, Walcott may have won, but then again who knows for sure? (Of course, both men, and both corners, knew the scoring rules going in, so that's an important fact as well.)

 

I believe under modern judging Walcott would have won but I also realize that aggression and Louis being the champion played a role in the judging at the time the fight took place.

From what I've seen, Walcott remained a step ahead all the way with his superior boxing but Louis was the aggressor (even if ineffective) throughout the bout.

 

I'm not sure if it was the case here but often when a draw was scored, the judges would give the fight to the boxer who scored a knockdown over the other. That's how Walcott won the decision over Jimmy Bivins so the knockdowns could have played a part had the fight been scored a draw.

 

But the Louis Walcott 1 fight was not scored a draw, sd win for Louis.

Marciano LarSarza I was scored a draw, than it went into points, and the knockdown save the Rock's unbeating record.

Had Walcott won 1 or so more rounds, perhaps the draw would have lead to the points system.

 

Basically how I see it.

 

Bumpy.

 

It isn't so, as no one alive has seen the complete fight its all speculation.

 

Responding to a 13-year-old post because it just happened to come up … in the rematch Louis was knocked down and was behind on two scorecards. He found an opening and got the KO so he left no doubt as far as not putting it in the judges’ hands, but there were plenty of doubts about how much he had left. If not for the taxman, and he could’ve walked away then and not looked back, IMO he’d be the unquestioned GOAT.

 

About time you came around. We'll you sort have of come around.

Yes it was a bad decision. It was so bad he MSG loudly booed ( which can be heard on film ) the decision. This happened in Joe Louis house of MSG! Louis had the body language of a loser, and said to Walcott he was sorry right after the decision was announced.

The initial ref was forced under protest ( ref Art Donovan ) and the sub voted for Walcott. And judging by his vote in the Louis vs. Farr match Donovan was either blind or very crooked only giving Farr one round! BS.

Anyway Louis won the rematch late in the fight being down in a round and behind by a significant margin. He caught Walcott show boating. Watch the film.

Yet the ref ( Frank Fallam ) again appeared to be in Louis pocket as he somehow had him ahead in the fight, prior to the stoppage. Say what?! Louis was protected on the cards like Canelo is today. It takes a blowout out in the ring to beat him in his title matches.