I think this would be an interesting matchup. Could Walcott and his cute boxing style utilize foot and upper body movement to slip inside and deliver his hookercut or would Wlad keep moving and keep Walcott on the end of his brutal left jab setting him up for the straight right? Walcott wasn't a runner so there would some good two-way action imo.
who is greater or who would win? Walcott was a cruiserweight by today's standards, and thats without any weight draining.
he's comparable to Liston. nearly the same height and probably 15 pounds less when each was at their respective primes, 210 and 195. Walcott had some damn fast hands and boy could he crack. great left hand. i think walcott is a pretty underrated hw champ who was a great counter-puncher. maybe i should have put it in the classic forum :think i think Walcott's foot and upper body movements would cause some problems for Dr. Cottonhammer. He was a very awkard fighter. Marciano had major problems with him in their first fight and he gave Joe louis all he could handle in both of their fights. Remember Louis had a great jab too but Walcott really neutralized it with his unorthodox style. He just made the mistake of trading combinations with Louis in their rematch.
Honestly Wlad takes this one with ease. not even close. In terms of greatness odds are on Wlad surpassing Jersey Joe by a longshot.
Well i agree Wlad would win but not with ease. But if Dr. Cottonhammer came out too tentative, Walcott could time him. Joe had the power to certainly stop him imo. Walcott threw sharp puches especially hooks and uppercuts. I'm pretty sure i know who Bert Sugar and Teddy Atlas would pick
I'm surprised by some of the opinions in this thread and I've got to question whether you guys have seen a great deal of Jersey Joe. Certainly opinions like "he is to small" won't wash for this great fighter. Wlad has every concievable physical advantage BUT Walcott has these advantages: Handspeed Craft Heart I nearly added generalship, but Wlad is actually an excellent ring general - in terms of creating climate for victory - so we'll leave that for now. Now, combining these advantages with Wlad's apparent deficiencies - severe reticence, seeming fear of the punch, in fact (I share Jim Watt's theory that "no-one has graver doubts about his chin than he does") - Walcott has a very serious chance. Overall, Walcott is the type of fighter that can put anyone on their ass with his combination of talents. My guess is that all of this is not enough to overcome the Wladimir physicality, but all of those predicting "easy win" haven't seen a great deal of one or the other on film. Klitschko WPTS 12 OR Klitschko WPTS 15. But Wlad visits the deck as many times as he did against Peter.
Wlad's smallest opponent was Exum Speight 207 lb and Prime Walcott was 190 lb... [url]http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=11028&cat=boxer[/url]
For what little it is worth, Walcott was bigger than 190 at prime by about 7 pounds. Unless your disputing that his two wins over Charles and his valiant losing effort to Marciano are not the best we've seen of him? If he was better than he was in those efforts i'd probably make Walcott favourite.