BoxRec

Both Sharkey and Walcott were managed by Tom O'Roarke, who spoke of a sparring session in which the 147 lb Walcott floored the 185 lb Sharkey.

Personally, I don't put much stock in sparring sessions(I think Dempsey would have KO'd Harry Greb in a real fight). I think Joe probably just clipped Tom as he rushed-in and put him on his arse. Historians seem to make a big deal of this though; as if it's proof positive that Walcott could have given Sharkey trouble.

What do you all think? Would Walcott have much of a shot against a fighter as big, strong and durable as Sharkey? Walcott liked to slug, which I think would be strategic suicide against Tom, who is a huge puncher and loves a good punch-up.

Nero3000 wrote:Both Sharkey and Walcott were managed by Tom O'Roarke, who spoke of a sparring session in which the 147 lb Walcott floored the 185 lb Sharkey.

Personally, I don't put much stock in sparring sessions(I think Dempsey would have KO'd Harry Greb in a real fight). I think Joe probably just clipped Tom as he rushed-in and put him on his arse. Historians seem to make a big deal of this though; as if it's proof positive that Walcott could have given Sharkey trouble.

What do you all think? Would Walcott have much of a shot against a fighter as big, strong and durable as Sharkey? Walcott liked to slug, which I think would be strategic suicide against Tom, who is a huge puncher and loves a good punch-up.

Walcott was a true pound per pound fighter with off the charts tale of the tape measurements for a man of his stature. Walcott holds a win over Joe Choynsky, but Sharkey had an iron man like body. Bad match up for Walcott on styles.

pound per pound wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:Both Sharkey and Walcott were managed by Tom O'Roarke, who spoke of a sparring session in which the 147 lb Walcott floored the 185 lb Sharkey.

Personally, I don't put much stock in sparring sessions(I think Dempsey would have KO'd Harry Greb in a real fight). I think Joe probably just clipped Tom as he rushed-in and put him on his arse. Historians seem to make a big deal of this though; as if it's proof positive that Walcott could have given Sharkey trouble.

What do you all think? Would Walcott have much of a shot against a fighter as big, strong and durable as Sharkey? Walcott liked to slug, which I think would be strategic suicide against Tom, who is a huge puncher and loves a good punch-up.

Walcott was a true pound per pound fighter with off the charts tale of the tape measurements for a man of his stature. Walcott holds a win over Joe Choynsky, but Sharkey had an iron man like body. Bad match up for Walcott on styles.

And let's not forget that Choynski was well past his prime when he fought Joe. Could Walcott have beaten the 1895 version of Choynski? Maybe, but I wouldn't bank on it.