It's kinda surprising they never fought when you think about it... many common opponents, top fighters during the same period, etc. Anyway, who do you think wins? How? Walcott fought from 1930-1953 and went 51-18-2 (32) overall. 6' with a 74" reach and was solid at almost 200Lbs. He was born in 1914... give or take a year or two. Moore fought from 1935-1963 and went 185-23-11 (131) 1NC but I have seen his record listed differently. 5' 11" with a 75" reach and he was solid at almost 190Lbs. He was born in 1916... or close to it. Both men are all-time greats but both had the occasional loss thruout their career... and not just at the end of their career. Their most notable common opponents- Rocky Marciano: Walcott- LKOby13 and LKOby1 (he dropped Marciano in their first fight) Moore- LKOby9 (he also dropped Marciano, Moore and Walcott are the only men who dropped Marciano) Ezzard Charles: Walcott- 2-2 (1) Moore- 0-3 (he was stopped once) Harold Johnson: Walcott- 1-0 (1) (KO3) Moore- 4-1 (1) (KO14 in their last fight) Jimmy Bivins: Walcott- 1-0 Moore- 4-1 (4) (LKOby6 in the loss) Joey Maxim: Walcott- 2-1 Moore- 3-0 6-5 (2) He beat Charles, Johnson, Bivins, and Maxim. He lost to Marciano, Charles, and Maxim. I'm gonna go with Walcott in a close fight. If they fought 3 times, all 3 fights would be close. I see Walcott winning 2 out of 3. 11-6 (5) He beat Johnson, Bivins, and Maxim. He lost to Marciano, Charles, Johnson, and Bivins.
I think Walcott was both slightly better and bigger than Moore, so have to go with him. You missed off the Marciano fight, both lost but Walcott did far better and wasn't far off winning I actually think Walcott has a case for being P4P above Moore, despite being bigger, I just think he's better
I will go with Walcott, though its a tough call I have tons of respect for Moore. I see Joe winning on points in a close fight.
what a match up!! I dont think anyone can be wrong predicting this one. Both simular in that their styles evolved with age. Both so well conditioned and experienced veterans that age wasnt quite the disadvantage it should have been. Although always talented These two preserved their potentials by both holding back until oppertunitys came their way. They would have burned out earlier had they had the chances earlier and they might never have developed into what they became.
dream match-up. i think moore is one of the few who could stick with walcott on the tactical front, and i could see both of them landing cleanly as they'd each find openings many others wouldn't. this would be far from a stalemate, a clever fight, but with lots of action. it's a pick 'em, i'd go for moore, just. maybe by knockout too.
This would've been a technical dream match to me. Up there with McCallum/Hopkins, if not better, for me. I have to favor the less consistent Walcott at his best (at heavyweight) but I really think anything could happen. c You're just saying crazy **** all over the place today. :twisted:
The styles favor Jersey Joe I think by a bit, but I can't get the image of him doing something stupid/cocky and getting creamed by a right hand or something.
That was actually 11 months ago, I've been saying crazy things on here since 2004, get it right. Seriously though Walcott is more skilled than Moore and his best wins compare favourably
