Pinning down the definition of "journeyman" for heavyweights

Pre Fight

National Boxing Association Ratings July 11, 1947:

Heavyweights

Joe Louis, Champion

Outstanding Boxers
1. Jersey Joe Walcott
2. Joe Baksi
3. Elmer Ray
4. Tami Mauriello

National Boxing Association's Quarterly Ratings: December, 1947

Joe Louis, Champion

Most Logical Contender

1. Jersey Joe Walcott

Outstanding Boxers

1. Olle Tandberg
2. Elmer Ray
3. Joe Baksi
4. Joey Maxim

Since when is the RING Magazine and NBAs # 1 rated contender, Oustanding Boxer, Most Logical Contender a "journeyman?"


Those articles you posted are laughable. Plenty of film on Walcott for us to judge with our own two eyes. If you think he's a journeyman, state your case.

 

LMAO, thanks for the laugh Seamus. That's one smart boxing observer from the "washington evening star"

 

There’s probably a gray area there that some people exist in or move up and down from one to another, but to me an opponent generally has enough wins on his ledger to make him viable (commissions have to pass on matchups) and those wins are over what you’re calling cans — most of whom only have so many fights or lost almost all of them.

The way the business works (and has for some time) is a guy loses enough fights in a row, commissions stop approving them for matchups (against better guys on bigger shows). So the guy or his manager go back to the low minors and pick up a win (sometimes choosing and paying the opponent themselves) to make themselves viable for a few more fights.

Look at the records of some of these guys and you’ll see a win here and there which someone paid for so they could get back on the horse and get approved for money fights. If you’re 11-29, you’re getting paid for most of those 29 losses — you don’t fight a 10-0 guy who was an Olympian or three-time National Golden Gloves champ for chump change.

 

Since almost all contemporary observers viewed him as a journeyman made good. They knew his career better than you, saw him in real time, understood the flux of the division... And the unanimous conclusion was that Walcott was a journeyman who hung on until such a moment as the division was completely depleted for his star to shine.

Should I quote a bunch more?

 

Jersey Joe Walcott had more than a couple good wins


Ezzard Charles 2x- Hall of Fame Champion with 8 title defenses, NBA # 1 Logical Contender in Rematch

Jimmy Bivins- Hall of Famer. Rated # 2 by NBA Oustanding Boxer, Rated # 2 by RING Magazine

Harold Johnson- Hall of Famer. Rated # 3 by NBA Outstanding boxer at 175lb, Rated # 3 by RING magazine at 175lb

Joey Maxim 2x- Hall of Famer. 1st win: Rated # 6 by NBA Oustanding Boxer, Rated # 10 by RING Magazine
Rematch: Rated # 4 by NBA Oustanding Boxer, Rated # 7 by RING magazine

Elmer Ray - Rated # 1 by NBA Outstanding Boxer, Rated # 2 by RING Magazine

Joe Baksi- Rated # 2 by NBA Logical Contender , Rated # 4 by RING Magazine

Lee Oma- Rated # 5 by NBA, Honorable Mention, Rated # 6 by RINGMagazine

Lee Q Murray- Rated # 6 by NBA Honorable Mention, Rated # 6 by RING Magazine

Omelio Agramonte- Rated by NBA Honorable Mention, Rated # 9 by RING Magazine

Curtis Sheppard- Rated by NBA Honorable Mention, Rated # 10 by RING Magazine

Hein Ten Hoff- one year later, Rated # 4 by NBA Outstanding Boxer

Willie Reddish- 2 years later, rated # 4 by NBA

Lorenzo Pack - Golden Gloves Champion, Huge Puncher. Knocked out # 5 Leroy Haynes and stopped Johnny Whiters.



Oh and I didn't include

Joe Louis * - Hall of Fame Champion, Record Breaking Title Reign, Consensus top 2 all time

Which should definitely have been considered a win

 

We know your stance on the heavyweight division Post World War II. It doesn't matter really. We have film of most of these guys including Walcott, and Walcott looks great. We have film of Walcott victims whom look great! Walcott looks Great enough that men like master boxers such as Bernard Hopkins and James Toney have publicly admitted on TV they study his film.

Also, your calling any man (who breaks into the top 10 rankings for 8 straight years, including 2 years as # 1 Logical Status) a "journeyman" shows you have zero clue what the definition even means

Oh and for all your "contemporary reports" from racist white men (feel free to post more, I love a good laugh, let's hear all about there contemporary reports raving about goofy crude white men from the 20s you mock every day) I could post several in return from some of the greatest boxing minds whom ever lived who speak very highly about jersey joe walcott

"Walcott was one of the finest technicians in heavyweight boxing history"- Eddie Futch

 

Hey who knew...some 70 years later after the Washington Evening Star Journalist described Walcott as a "plodder"...someone would make a Jersey Joe Walcott "Footwork" highlight video that would generate 108,000 views on youtube.

This content is protected

 

Plod away Jersey Joe! LMAO. I should apply for a job at the Washington Evening Star. Sounds like a trained chimpanzee could do that job.

 

On film, Walcott looks old and inconsistent. If you only watch highlight reels he looks great. His legs were giving out as he got older, a fact commented on by contemporary observers and readily apparent to anyone who knows how to watch a fighter.

The "racist white men" is a great piece of selective desperation on your part. And who exactly are the folks who sang the choruses for Sullivan, Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Jeffries and Dempsey... and Marciano? You have lost all credence with that comment alone.

The dude lost 30% of the time he entered the ring. He was what he was, a hard working, no BS guy with a slew of mouths to feed who hung on and got lucky when the talent in the division plummeted. God Bless Him. He was a good human, just not a truly great boxer.

 

I would say against Louis (33 years old) , he displays incredible footwork, fast hands, head movement, triple jab combinations, beautiful counterpunching, and great athleticism. The man could hit hard as well, with either hand.

Legs "giving out", sure but at what noticeable effect?

Out of the 26 rounds boxed vs Louis, I would estimate he won a vast majority of them (I would guess 16-17 rounds). He gets on his bicycle late vs Louis in first fight because he was told he has decision locked up. He moves swift and fast and Louis can't catch him. In the rematch he gets caught by a perfect Louis combination while he is dancing on his toes. Hardly the sign of an old shot fighter.

After losing the first two fights vs Charles, Walcott wins the next two fights. Shouldn't things only get worse for the aging journeyman? Walcott ended hall of famer Ezzard Charles long 4 year unbeaten run and it was hardly a fluke. It was an all time great performance on film, with Walcott shutting charles out before knocking him out cold.

At age 38 in Marciano I (Where I admit he doesn't move as fast as he did vs Louis), He still batters away at Marciano in rounds 11 and 12 seriously hurting Marciano in Round 11. Did his legs suddenly turn into a pumpkin in round 13?

And are you going to ignore all his great victories over men rated in the top 5 by NBA and RING from 1945-48? Men like Bivins were rated this highly before the war. Walcott's peak was probably late 1945-1948 where he got to combine the best of Florio and Bocchichio while still being young enough (31-34 years old) where he hadn't started an abrupt physical decline.


You just can't seem to be convinced that Walcott meeting up with manager Felix Bocchichio and a very good trainer in Dan Florio in 1945 actually made him a better fighter. Walcott was able to quit his job and devote full time to boxing. No more going taking fights on 36 hour notice without training for them, no more going to bed hungry at night so your family can eat, but you just don't believe those things. You actually think in your brain Walcott was the same fighter in the 30s working a full time job all day without the later help of bocchichio and florio and the full time hours in a boxing gym.

 

You quoted a paper who described Walcott as a "plodder". Any credence left with that one?

 

Your talking about the last six months of his career. Pierre’ fought for almost ten years before this.

I don’t think David Price could have given Frank Bruno the fight Pierre did.

 

Durable or not, Price was the house fighter. Each time Thompson beat him he came over as the opponent for Price to beat on a David Price show in front of David price fans. David was the ticket seller. Lot of fans from his hometown. He had a promoter.

I’m not sure Price ever fought outside of the UK as a pro if I remember. So that’s no travelling journeyman is it?

 

Oh go **** off with that lad.

 

= Payed a lot to lose and win sometimes".

That's it.