Jersey Joe Walcott vs Antonio Tarver

FFS is there no boxer active before 1969 that could defeat any boxer active after 1969? No, John L Sullivan won't beat Lennox Lewis but for crying out loud WTF parameter does Tarver hold an advantage over Walcott? A bald head?

I'm terribly vexed.

 

Tarver could crack with that left hand.

Even during his limited end-of-career heavyweight run, it packed some pop.

I was once asked to scout him (from video review) as an opponent for a rising heavyweight (the fight was under consideration but ultimately did not happen) and my main conclusion was he could lull you to sleep and then bang with the left — often singular shots, but he could be very effective with it.

 

Take a look at some of the guys Walcott lost to.

He’s pleasing to the eye but was hardly a dominant fighter. He lost to far worse guys than Tarver.

 

JJW had 71 fights. He lost quite a few early in his career when he was basically starving, and lost at the end when he was over the hill. The dude fought and arguably defeated a prime Joe Louis. Also crushed Ezzard Charles who most rank as a top ten all-time LHW.

Tarver had 39 fights and only 1 HOF boxer who was past his prime. And he was busted for PEDS.

Compare their resumes. Tarver's pales in comparison.

 

Well, for one, Tarver didn't lose every third time he entered the ring.

 

Because he fought and won versus literally no bodies. Even you could beat your wife most of the time. The only win in his entire career that stands out is the damaged RJJ.

 

JJW fought 5 HOFers and defeated 3 of them and in addition the first Louis loss was considered a total robbery:

Marciano
Joey Maxim
Ezzard Charles
Jimmy Bivins
Joe Louis

Tarver fought two potential HOFers:
RJJ (lost 1, won 2)
Hopkins (loss)

 

The Hall of Fame is a vanity project for boxing historians to justify the hot air coming from their mouths that could be put to better use cooling their tea.

Carl Froch could get off the couch today, take a time machine, and wipe out the 1954 heavyweight Top Ten in a fortnight.

 

Walcott to strong. Tarver doesn’t have the power to bother him.

 

Ok now I realize you're trolling. No problem. Good night.

 

Louis was nowhere near his best when Walcott squeaked by him.

 

That being said, i still pick Jersey Joe to beat Tarver

 

C'mon man.
You are sometimes a Bracing Antidote to brain dead/automatic sentimentalist bias.
Then other times you show the same extreme bias (& disrespect) against anyone from an earlier era.

You really are dismissing all the best JJW wins (& possible robbery against Louis)?

And it was a good point how Wolcott (with terrible management, working full time, & literally hungry) had a large disadvantage for a cunk of his career.
You wanna dismiss an athlete for past peak losses & disregard all illness, handicaps, age, etc?
Then you must think not only Langford & Charles were bums-despite being largely blind & very sick-but Roy Jones Jr. was always a bum.
Despite not having the literal handicap of someone like Charles (or late career Ali).

Try not to be a mirror-image of the most cartooishly biased of the most absurdly irrational traditionalists.

 

True, but neither was Ali in Manilla, but he was still great.
And beating that version Louis at HW was still very impressive, & Tarver never did something so good.

 

Walcott was very clever, hit very hard & had far too much experience against ATG comp. That's a deadly combo for a fighter who's strength was definitely not ring IQ.