Jack Johnson vs Jersey Joe Walcott

Jack was one of the best ever byKO

 

Walcott whips him.
So much faster and sharper.

No way Johnson wins. No way.

 

Tough fight to call. Walcott should win from a technical standpoint, but for some reason I'm fairly confident that Johnson gets aggressive and roughs up Walcott for a stoppage win late.

 

If you watch the films, you'd see Walcott hit harder, and had better skills. Johnson could not hurt him.

How about Choynski Ko'd Johnson cold with a left to the head, and Walcott had a nice left hook, like the one who put Charles out for the count?

 

Johnson on film becomes aggressive when the other guy is on his way out, or baldy over matched. Walcott would land better than anything Johnson took as champion ( save Willard who Ko'd Johnson ) , remember Johnson was marked up and dazed by what little Ketchel landed and said he jaw was never so sore.

I think Walcott hit harder than Ketchel, and if there is disagreement on that, there is none on who placed their punches better.

 

I think Wacott's movement would trouble Johnson .

 

A past his prime, just north of 160 pound Jack O'Brien who was a weak puncher troubled Johnson with his movement. What do you think Walcott would do?!

The fight reports:

Wire reports in multiple newspapers, including the San Francisco Call, had the bout a draw. The New York Times also had it a draw.

The New York Sun, Wilkes-Barre Times Leader, and Washington Herald had O'Brien winning three rounds, with two even and the fifth round to Johnson.

The Trenton Times reported that the referee stated that he thought O'Brien was the winner by a shade.

The Philadelphia Inquirer, which scored the bout for Johnson, reported: "Three or four times during the mix-ups, O'Brien was roughed to the floor, and once he got tangled in the ropes."

 

I take issue with those who say Walcott was faster than Johnson. I see a tremendous natural athlete when I watch Johnson. To me, Johnson's handspeed is one of his greatest assets. Just watch him when he puts combinations together against Burns and Ketchel. He was a counter-puncher whose fight strategy depended on the opponent he was facing. He waited to see what was being presented and then acted accordingly. At age 30, he would have been stronger and heavier than Walcott, and, I think, faster too. I think he would have dominated Walcott strengthwise on the inside and would have been able to keep him at a distance on the outside. If they were fighting each other when they were both 37, maybe Walcott would win, but at their peaks I take Johnson.

 

Who said Johnson wasn't fast handed? He was. However his guard was low, he was too stationary, and he didn't as hard as Walcott.

Walcott would have defeated Burns and Kethel faster than Johnson did. Yes, Johnson was an expert clinch and hit type, who sometimes hit on breaks, or went low, but Walcott is not a stationary fool to clinch and hold. He's got much quicker feet, and Johnson in his fight with little Jack O'Brien had issues with that. O'Brien could not punch a lick.

While Johnson could counter punch wide open types, he was not in Walcott class as a counter puncher.

 

Me? Never seen a boxing match and have no boxing films or books on the subject.
McVey had a nice left hook and was 205lbs, he didn't do so well against Jack.
Johnson couldn't hurt him? Yet 186lbs Charles had his down for 9 in their second fight?
"His guard was too low and he was too stationary"?
Yet for 14 years,1901-1915 until he was 37 years old ,nobody knocked him out and when Willard managed the feat he had to fight for 78 minutes before accomplishing it? Walcott was ko'd 5 times and during his best years, Johnson never was.Maybe his technique wasn't so bad after all?Lol

 

Johnson KO

 

Even though nobody likes Johnson’s style, he was effective and really hard to beat. He really dominated for a very long time and though people can say it was different then I still say it was actually as difficult then to be that dominant taking into account the gloves and rules of that time.

We probably don’t appreciate how clever the guy was in the ring. I just get the impression at his best Johnson had the temperament to bide his time against all odds. The guy just neutralised whatever somebody wanted to do. And I think a great fighter that was proven in one era as much as he was could pretty much always neutralise what any fighter wants to do. Not necessarily win, but stop the other man doing what he wants to do.

So whilst we have better quality film of Walcott and can better appreciate and understand all that he did I cannot just opt for Walcott because he fought at a better time because I just don’t think that means Johnson cannot stop what Walcott wants to do. Johnson is that horrible to fight. He could just frustrate the hell out of anybody. He only fought a guy when the other guy was half finished.

Walcott by disqualification or Johnson by late KO.

 

With reference to the underlined ,do you seriously believe Johnson could not have ended those fights earlier had he chosen to? If having seen those fights you honestly believe Johnson was going all out, I'd have to say you haven't the faintest idea what you were looking at!
ps Jim Jeffries commenting on the Johnson v OBrien fight said OBrien would give problems for anyone over 6rds,The next day papers said there was no demand for a rematch between them ,what does that tell you?

 

Some good analysis on both sides here that have some merit. But, I'd favor a prime Jack Johnson to honestly destroy Jersey Joe. Jack's boxing skills are underrated , he was generally patient and ,from what I see, in my opinion he would adapt in his prime and blast Walcott out in what would probably be viewed as a pretty even fight when it ended

 

LOL, Mcvey had a swing left hook telegraphed it. What film are you watching? He was also a teenager novice for Jack Johnson. Learn the facts.

Walcott fought far better opposition than Johnson did. Dangerous men in their primes. Heck, Charles is probably better than anyone Johnson beat, and before you talk out of your rear end, we both agree Tommy Burns, all 5'7" 168 pounds of him was Johnson best pure win