Could the 38 year old walcott who fought rocky win the belt in other eras?

Dempsey: likely stops him late if its a prime dempsey. A younger walcott would probably fare much better with his ring iq and movement.

Tunney: lol.

Max baer: walcott could pull it off, but he might have to get off the floor to do it.

Louis: considering louis decisioned and stopped younger, less shopworn versions of walcott, absolutely not.

Patterson: close fight, but youth, hand speed, and volume punching are on pattersons side. Walcott definitely had a chance due to pattersons weaker chin.

Liston: lol.

Cassius clay: i dont care if clay spoke highly of walcott, this would be a massacre the moment clay got serious and figured out walcott. Mid round stoppage.

Terrel: terrel jabs, grabs, smothers, and rabbit punches but cant compensate for walcotts edge in sweet science. Walcott by lopsided decision.

Frazier: frazier would literally kill him. One of the worst style matchups, frazier grinds him down and stops him within 9.

Foreman: the undefeated, aggressive foreman would actually have his work cut out for him. Honestly, walcott has a good chance of causing an upset if he stays off the ropes and doesnt get greedy going for too many power shots. Foreman always has a sluggers chance, but was too immature and lacked stamina, walcott by split decision.

70's ali: stops walcott late. Walcott had never encountered a fighter that big who could also move, had an iron chin, good speed, decent power, etc. As long as ali is in shape and doesnt take rounds off/goofs around, he should win.

Norton: brutally kos walcott. This is the man who gave ali, young, and holmes nightmares. Terrible matchup.

Holmes: another brutal ko. No 6ft, 38 year old is going to beat a prime holmed.

Berbick: walcott could pull it off

Witherspoon: could either win by wide ud or knocks walcott out whenever.

Smith: walcott wins by tko with his sharp, accurate punches.

Tyson: lol.

Holyfield: lol

Bowe: lol

Lewis: lol!

Vitali: now i could actually see walcott doing the impossible if he could repeat what byrd did and avoid exchanges. But more often than not, vitali is too big, awkward, and tough for walcott to overcome.

Wladmir klitschko: lol




Does anyone disagree? Am i being too harsh?

 

But that was a YOUNGER LESS SHOPWORN walcott who gave loyis a hard time.

And a wins a win. Ive seen numerous threads where u dont even try to hide your bias against louis so im not gonna bother having a debate with you on this particular subject.

I will say this tho: holyfield had three competitive fights with bowe, showing impressive will to win and toughnesd and ended up 1-2 officially. Holyfield was clearly way past his prime when he later became a 4x hw champ in his bouts with ruiz. Do you think a 37 year old holyfield could beat a prime riddick bowe?

So you think that the walcott of the marciano fights could beat either deontay wilder, anthony joshua, or joseph parker?

Care to explain why and how?

Foreman was schooled by jimmy young but he beats walcott in a one sided beating?

I completely agree. I dont always subscribe to the idea sports evolve in a purely linear fashion and modern athletes are "always" better than old ones, but the era in which walcott one the title was pretty bad given the context. Like you said, the best contenders were 3 men in their mid-late 30's who had been in more than 50 fights (muliple losses), fighting 4-5-6x a year and were pretty battle worn yet they passed the title around like hot potato and prevented the younger fighters from becoming champ. That says a lot about the quality of younger contenders in this time frame. Rocky was the only one who managed to pull it off with extreme difficulty despite having the edge in power, cardio, chin, good matchmaking, etc.

Absolutely ridiculous to suggest a 38 year old heavy mileage having, many stoppage receiving walcott could waltz into the 70's, 80's, 90's etc and grab a belt without abusing PEDs and/or very careful matchmaking. Especially when you consider he was 5'11/6'0, usually under 200 lbs, and would be going up against men who averaged 15-30 lbs heavier, 10 years younger, highly talented mobile big men.

 

I mentioned his listed height on both boxrec and wikipedia. Are they wrong?

Arent you one of the "size isnt that big of a deal" pro classic boxer guys? Why would you make a big deal out of a 1 inch discrepency between the two heights ive seen listed for him?

Do you have anything to contribute to the thread other than this meaningless complaint?

 

I do the same thing when describing listons heigh as 6'1-6'1 1/2 because both are listed in numerous sources. Holyfield is frequently listed between 6'1-6'2 or even 6'2 1/2. Foreman is frequently listed as either being 6'3 1/2 or 6'4.

My point was only to show no matter what source you use, walcott of the rocky fight is giving up several inches in height, 15-30 lbs in weight, 10 years in age, etc but you zeroed in on height despite frequently downplaying how significant this factor is in a fight and it wasnt even the main focus of the conversation.

All reasonable picks.

I wasnt saying hes get smoked in any other era, in fact i picked him to beat several belt holders, even some bigger modern ones. But the idea walcott at that stage somehow wasnt way past his prime like some people suggest is ridiculous. And even more ridiculous hed give prime ATG's like ali, holmes, lennox, tyson, etc a decent fight or beat them in title fights.