Why do most people give Charles the nod over Walcott..

I consider a brutal knockout as putting the debate to bed.

 

Thought you didn't read my posts ? So you lie on top of being obnoxious and a mediocre talent . No surprise . Glad to see I'm still in your head

 

Firpo, Fulton and Morris were all in their physical primes which is a huge difference. In addition all had vastly different styles .. I completely agree about Willard .. Dempsey is give so much credit for destroying a 37 year old man who had been highly inactive ...

The 51 Louis was of course still a highly polished fighter, no question .. he just was a vastly diminished version .... legs shot, speed slow, abilioty to absorb punishment and stamina limtied , power a shell ..

 

Charles should have won 3 out of 4 IMO... and the opinion of many. Charles clearly beat him in their first two meetings. Yes, Walcott got the only KO win but Charles did much more than Walcott (career wise) IMO.

 

Ezzard was still very good... close to prime... Walcott was prime

 

Walcott looked better in 1947 vs Joe Louis than he did in any of the Ezzard Charles fights. Charles does not beat the 1947 Jersey Joe Walcott. I also think a strong case can be made Charles was in his prime in 1949 during their first fight at age 27.

 

I have 2 agree with him this time .
And BTW , Charles also does not beat the 1951 Arnold Cream .
And does any1 know if Charles beat Cream more convincingly in their 1st fight than Cream beat Charles in their 4th ?
it was proven that h2h that Cream > Charles , also vs Louis .
Cream impressed much more than Charles and did so against a better version of Louis while being as old as Louis himself .

 

Don't know if anybody did this before, didn't bother to check.

Common opponents:

Joe Louis
Charles won by UD15
Walcott lost by SD15, KO11

Louis was older against Charles, Walcott arguably won the first fight and was ahead on two cards until being KO'd in the rematch. In the end Charles did get the job done unlike Walcott so you have to give the edge to him.

Rocky Marciano
Charles lost by UD15, KO8
Walcott lost by KO13, KO1

Losing fights for both at the end of their careers, Walcott had an epic effort against Marciano, a fight he had won on the scorecards until being KO'd. Charles too had his moments in losing a 15 round decision. Neither man was the same in rematches, but Charles put up a better effort than Walcott obviously.

Elmer Ray
Charles lost by SD10, won by KO9
Walcott lost by SD10, won by MD

Charles fought Ray after Walcott's close series with him. Ray had not shown any signs of slowing down and won what was seen as a robbery against Charles until getting KO'd by him in the rematch, ending his career as a top heavyweight (Ray at that time was ranked in the top 3).

Rex Layne
Charles won by KO11, lost by PTS10, won by UD10
Walcott lost by UD10

Walcott put in an uninspiring performance against the mauling, awkward Rex Layne and was upset by the up and comer. Charles later faced Layne in a crossroads match-up, and KO'd him. He lost a rematch by a terrible decision and beat Layne soundly in a third match-up.

Harold Johnson
Walcott by KO3
Charles lost by SD10

A young Harold Johnson fought Walcott who had KO'd his father years before, and ended up collapsing from a spine injury after Walcott was having the better of the fight. Charles lost by a razor-close decision to a more experienced Harold Johnson.

Joey Maxim
Walcott lost by PTS10, won 2x by MD & SD
Charles won 4x by UD, once by MD

Walcott had his troubles with the cagey Maxim, Charles dominated him in a series.

Joe Baksi
Charles by TKO11
Walcott by UD10

Walcott's coming out performance was against the durable slugger Baksi whom he beat by a convincing decision. A few years later, Charles cut up Baksi and became the first and only man to ever stop him in a career of 72 fights.

Jimmy Bivins
Charles lost by UD10, won 3x by UD and once by KO4
Walcott won by SD10

Walcott appeared to beat Bivins but 2 of the judges actually scored it for Jimmy by rounds, although Walcott was given the decision based on a knockdown. Bivins beat a young Charles, who avenged the loss 4 times.

Lee Oma
Charles won by TKO10
Walcott won by UD10

Walcott outboxed Oma to win a clear decision, years later Charles stopped Oma with a barrage of left hooks which forced Oma to call it quits.

 

Pretty good summary !

 

When comparing a significantly older fighter 2 a younger d younger will almost always have d better of d h2h comparison .
d writer of this text was either biased or lacking in knowledge because I already explained why Cream's achievements vs Louis were better than Charles' , not 2 mention their actual series of fights which Cream clearly won .
Ignoring & omitting these 2 points I just wonder how many more inaccuracies I could find in this comparison but I admit than in d meantime it does close d gape between them .

Charles also did a bit better vs Marchegiano in a way , hurting him less but extending him more so it may be up to d criteria , not 2 mention that Marchegiano was Cream's last 2 fights in which his age came to d maximum of its influence .

 

Walcott was in his prime when he faced Louis.

 

And Louis was in his prime when he faced Cream .
Cream was of d same age , actually a tad bit older and started his career younger .
Which heavy was washed up @ 33 ? Cream ? Charles ? Ali ? Patterson ? Liston ? Holyfield ? Wlad ? Vitali ? Lewis ? Rahman ? McCall ? Corrie Sanders ? Toney ? no1 . not even Louis .

 

I guess you think you come across as being more knowledgeable when you refer to them by the their given names of Cream and Marchegiano? Dude, Charles had the much better career. Walcott was great, but Charles was better.

 

Charles might have been a bit better , but Cream was d superior man 2 fight at open weight , even if not by much as d comparison suggests but still does not implies .
I usually cum across as being knowledgeable and well informed .