Jersey Joe Walcott in the modern era

Ezzard walked into that hook/uppercut. You don't see either of the Klits giving up that kind of distance unless going for the clinch. For all of Joe's trickery and slight of hand that so impresses some, his results were uneven. The Wlad that destoyed Byrd was very on top of his game and would probably do better against Walcott who wasn't as good at slipping. Ultimately, the cute little moves didn't matter because Wlad was fighting at the distance and pace he preferred.

 

I agree. Wlad is a nightmare scenario for Walcott. Just a bad style matchup, although I'd say Walcott's better than Byrd and Chambers and would at least have a better chance than either of those. But incredibly slim percentages regardless.

 

Ehhhhh, Sure, but you at least have to give Walcott credit for being better offensively than Byrd, and a better puncher. Walcott was uneven, but in the modern times he wouldn't be arguably losing to Fres Oquendo, either.

 

Point taken, although by and large physical impressiveness doesn't always mean much.
Put flabby, 38 year old Sanders in the picture to the right and it would look even worse.
But we saw what happened there...

 

i could go on and make an essay on why Walcott wouldn't be a top 5 Hw today, and why being considered greater by some, does not make him also a better boxer then Byrd....but i'll just resume myself to this emoticon.

atsch

 

Ok, well give me some examples, other than, hurr durr Da Klits are really big n strong. I mean honestly give me some reason, there resume is not as good, they look worse on film than Jersey Joe. They fight in a era full of bums and overweight fat *******s. I could go on and on

 

Congrats, you are right, the Klits are taller and heavier, so naturally they win, right?
:rofl:roflatsch

 

Some of his stuff that catches the eye is just little more than showboating/stalling tactics. He didn't do it every fight, I'm not sure why people are so impressed with his piruets and shuffles, and shoulder shimmys. He danced pretty good but was really a powerful counter-puncher, so he's doing just as well or better when he's more flat-footed.

I notice there was far less of that shuffle stuff in his 3rd fight with Charles, and his 1st with Marciano, if any at all.
And he fought as well as ever in those battles.
Less stalling, more aggression.

 

Can you tell me why there are weight classes in the first place if the size has no relevance?

 

WITH PROPER TRAINING jOE WINS A TITLE FOR SURE.

 

The reason heavyweight is the cutoff is because it's pretty well known that after a fighter reaches about 180 to 190 pounds, he has all the knockout power that he is ever going to have. That's why there isn't a superheavyweight division in Pro Boxing

 

you're a ******, i rest my case.
You're comparing an 190lbs cruiser with 18 loses against similar sized opponents from 60 years ago to a 21century ultra dominant superheavyweight with great athleticism and boxing fundamentals.
don't you see how ****ing silly you look?

A prime Byrd would school any version of Jersey, he also has greater wins on his resume, which by your criteria makes him a greater fighter then Walcott..fact that you somehow conveniently omitted.

And size is very important, especially when we're talking about some +55lbs and +6imch in height...you ******.
You can't tell anyone seriously that a 190 lbs boxer can punch as hard or as effectively as a boxer 60lbs heavier.

 

and a ****ing ******ed thing that i noticed on classic posters and/or klitschko haters is that they all/ or some of them think that only size is what goes for the Klits; their head is so much up their assholes that they don't see their athletic capabilities and boxing fundamentals, they think size is the only factor which gives them the complete control over the supposed weakest era in HW hstory; the idiots don't realize that there are far bigger HW out there then the Klits.

 

comeback to talk about Klits when you learn more about them.

Until then you're comments are reduced to poor troll attempts with ******ed emoticons

 

Your choice of words reflects your iq is well below average.