Very good or great? Volume 10: Jersey Joe Walcott

Do you not get that Walcott outboxed Louis for LITERALLY 25 rounds.. He won more rounds and did so convincingly. Yes, his showboating cost him when Louis cost him. HOwever, isn't it odd that the only time Louis put Walcott away was during his showboating? He didn't outbox him to get the KO.. Walcott was showboating because of how dominating he was looking and feeling. A mistake to be sure, but let's not act like Louis outboxed Walcott.. it was the EXACT opposite. Louis was well past his best??? Surely you don't believe that.. He may have been slightly past his best.. well past his best is a stretch indeed. You mention Marciano KOing Walcott twice.. he did.. but did you forget that he gave Marciano THE BEST FIGHT of his career. He was never down on the cards in any of his fights that late as he was with Walcott. Giving an ATG with NO losses the best fight of his career.. a fight he was well ahead on the cards.. must count for something.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_p7Dguyjbk

O yeah this guy was real washed up in 1946-1947 :roll:

 

Is it though. Even if we concede the first fight for Walcott, Louis was ahead on one card in the rematch, and down a round on the other. I think it would be fairer to say that Walcott fought Louis to a standstill for 25 rounds. which is pretty dammed impressive.

 

He took 15 months off after the Mauriello fight, and that and his 2nd win against Conn were the only competitive real fights he'd had since 1942.
He'd lost 4 years due to war.
He said himself that the Mauriello fight was the last time he ever felt anything like his old self.
He 'dried out' for the Walcott fight and came in weak, according to him (IF WALCOTT EXCUSES FOR LOSING TO SIMON and LAYNE ARE FAIR, THEN TAKE LOUIS'S INTO ACCOUNT).

Louis was very much diminished in 1947-'48, that's why he was persuaded to retire.
Everyone at the time knew it.

 

The criticism of Walcott facing past prime versions of Louis and Walcott is a bit unfair when you bare in mind that Walcott is the same age as Louis and older than Charles. Ofcourse different fighters age differently and Louis probably wasn't still at his peak but it was still Joe Louis and Ezzard Charles in there with him.

 

Why post the Mauriello fight ?
That was 21 MONTHS BEFORE Joe Louis KO'd Walcott.

Joe Louis was a prime fighter for years, 1935 - '42.
He was well past it in 1948.
That's obvious.

 

It's not a criticism.
I just don't see what's so amazing about 'winning' a close debatable 15-rounder and then getting KO'd in 11 rounds by a past prime Joe Louis.
Walcott was at his peak. If you want to say he was old too, okay, we'll compare them when they were young, back in the 1930s.

Walcott's results against a 1947-'48 Joe Louis don't impress me any more than how the likes of Godoy, Conn, Farr performed against a pre-ww2 Joe Louis, when you take into account Louis's clear decline. They weren't great heavyweights either imo.
Walcott is a clear enough level below Joe Louis to be outside of the 'ATG' category, that's all.

He needed 3 attempts to defeat Ezzard Charles. I don't think Charles is a clear-cut ATG as a heavyweight either. It's highly contestable.

 

Louis was the exact same fighter in 1947 against Walcott as he was against Mauriello in 1946...deal with it. Louis weighed in a chizzled 213lb against Walcott, he looked big and strong. His power and finishing ability was still very much there. That 6 punch combination he threw on Walcott was one of the best of his career.


I would argue beating a 1946-1948 version of Joe Louis is a great achievement, not many could do it in history.

Was joe louis past his prime in 1947? yes. Was he way over the hill? No. He kept himself sharp during the war with tons of exhibitions. Louis really lost it after 1949.

 

Which is the main problem in the first fight Red... Any person.. any person watching the second fight could clearly see Walcott was ahead.. and not just ahead.. WELL ahead... Yet we have one judge having Louis ahead.. that is totally ridiculous. Which exemplifies the power and sway Louis had in his fights and in the first fight. I mean really.. do you think Louis was ahead at all? **** do you think Walcott was only ahead by 1 point? Come on.

 

Louis wasn't that far gone though was he and he was fresh from destroying Conn. Louis deteriorated allot after his first retirement but not so much leading upto the Walcott fight. Not that he isn't past his best but it's still a good version.

I'd say as a win/close fight this Louis was perhaps comparable to FOTC Ali prime wise.

Frazier and Walcott have similarities resume wise but nearly everyone considers Frazier great. Most consider Schmelling great too.

 

This ones a little perplexing.

I'm not arguing that Walcott is great rather than very good so a lot of your responses aren't meant for me. I was talking about Seamus comment. The truth about Walcott's footwork lies somewhere in the middle in regards to it being useless dance-step and some Godly-like feature to prove his technical wizardry.

 

In terms of the rounds, I think so consider 2/3s of press-rows had him in the 1st fight. Not to mention the three knockdowns in the two fights (Hey, I just mentioned it). We've got the Walcott-Louis II fight. I should re-watch it. What do you think of it. But even a standstill is impressive like you say.

Uh huh, I think we can properly evaluate excuses/reasons on their merits without being unfair or dismissive. I had not heard of what you just said of Louis but I know that a broken hand, and starvation are better than drying out a little more than desired.

What's a clear-cut ATG HW? Top 10, top 15? I'm genuinely curious.

 

Who on God's green earth can watch Walcott vs. Louis 2 and have Louis ahead by a point and even Walcott ahead by a point. This illustrates the sway Louis carried with the judges, which was obviously at work in their first fight. For God's sake watch the 2nd fight and tell me one person with knowledge of boxing that could have Louis ahead in that fight like one judge.. Jesus H. Christ.

 

Have you watched the 2nd fight Orriray.. Please give me your scoring up to the 11th round... There is no way Louis is winning that fight and I've never heard anybody claim he was really. yet one judge has him up.. which as I say.. illustrates exactly what went on in the first fight. Tell me your scoring. To me it's pretty clear.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected