Walcott scored 2 knockdowns in the first fight against Louis, but still lost the decision. How would boxing history have been different if Walcott had rightfully been declared the winner?
Probably wouldn't mean much. Louis would be declared as shot, which is a reasonable proposition. Louis was in his mid-30s in an era where sports medicine and training was relatively primitive. The wear and tear on his body must have been incredible.
Yeah, I mostly agree. It may have impacted his legacy a bit (well, it would have) but his legacy had been mostly built by then. As said, an inevitable rematch would have followed. And Louis was perfect in rematches.
I suspect that Louis would have won the rematch as he did in real time but in doing so would have been the first to regain the heavyweight title. I believe everything else would have unfolded as it actually did, with Walcott becoming the second to regain the title.
It would have been declared a robbery, they'd have insisted on a rematch, Louis sparks him making people assume the first fight was a fluke.
Walcott deserved to win the first fight according to a large panel of sports writers are the match. Regarding re-matches, they are almost always won by the historically greater fighter. The problem, in this case, was Walcott was doing even better vs Louis in the re-match! Then he inexplicably got cute and was nailed. Had Walcott won the first match, I think he'd enter the re-match with an even greater psychological edge.