Cutman Scabbers wrote:Ambling Alp II wrote:Walcott really had no management early in his career. that is when most of defeats came.
Had he fought in Rahman's situation he would have started out 20-0 like all the prospects now do. If Rahman would have been in Walcott's era without management he would have had a ton of losses.
Many modern fans don't seem to grasp this.
Most of the other losses came against people like Charles, Louis, and Marciano. He went 2-6 against those three. He almost beat Marciano the first time and should have got the decision against Louis the first time. Easily could have been 4-4. Rahman probably goes 0-8.
Walcott was much faster in both foot and hand speed, and was stronger.
Walcott was not perfect, but near his best he wins this easily.
Everything written is true.
Some mention of his defeat and that there's a lot or a lot of ways boxer who have a lot of defeats but they considered excellent (Duran, Ezzard, SRR, Langford)