He looks great on highlights but was rather inconsistent in actual fights. He also burned more energy than he had at times with superfluous movement. There is a reason he lost 20 times out of 71 fights. I have grown to really dislike highlight packages. They don't tell the narrative of a fight, or a fighter's ability to control the narrative. So, some B-level guys look absolutely brilliant on highlights while some A+ level guys look pedestrian. It's the ESPN slam dunk highlight reel mentality taking over a much more nuanced, complex activity.
Totally right on all points, especially on superfluous and wasted movements. Walcott was a fantastic feinter though IMO. I felt the same way about Griffith, Monzon etc. Watched his highlights and thought 'he looks good, but what's the hype about?'. When I actually studied his Boxing and full bouts, that turned into 'wow, this guy is amazing and totally in control of the ring'. I don't think you should analyse a guys style unless you have seen the majority of his full bouts. Otherwise it's like you said - highlight reel mentality.
Yes, he must be the only ATG who ultimately lost almost all the fights shown in his own highlight reel.
the man has an argument for being able to take a win OVER Any Traditional Sized Heavyweight in History... he would Lose some too, So What, that's Honest Boxing among the TOP, IF you meet or are willing to Fight the Top, you might lose, but if your one of them, you might win too. and JJW is CERTAINLY ONE of THEM... GREAT Fighter!!!
people have to stop believing this, they were ahead of their time nonsense... there were LOADS of MASTERS & Stylists... the 'FILM Footage' and or it's Operators was too often poor... it didn't always capture proper movement for various reasons, nothing to do with the Fighters!
Yeah, it's bizarre to read, here, of all places, that Walcott was "ahead of his time." I just don't understand how someone can come to that conclusion, it's so odd. This content is protected This content is protected