View Full Version : patterson vs. walcott


Dempsey 1919
02-03-2006, 05:28 PM
who wins?

http://www.stives-town.info/citizens/boxing/photos2/images/btn87.jpg floyd patterson

http://www.fighttoys.com/Walcott,Jersey%20Joe.JPG jersey joe watcott

M26
02-04-2006, 09:30 AM
A tough call. Floyd Patterson was very fast and had some power to his punches as well. He might be able to beat Joe Walcott to the punch and stop him.

Still, Walcott was a very clever boxer who also packed a solid punch, his left hook in particular. His chin was also better than that of Patterson.

I see this fight being dominated by Patterson early on. Walcott would figure him out though, and come back to take control later on. Somewhere in the later rounds, he catches Patterson and stops him.

Jersey Joe Walcott by ko11.

Kid Achilles
02-04-2006, 12:54 PM
I'm going with Walcott. He had more depth with his skillset, wasn't so straightforward in style. Also he was a bigger naturally stronger man.

Both underrated punchers who could take a guy out in short order. Both had less than stellar chins.

Yeah I'll go with Walcott, but I wouldn't bet money on it.

Dempsey 1919
02-04-2006, 02:19 PM
His chin was also better than that of Patterson.


lol, i knew someone would say something like that. watcott had a better chin? patterson's chin is far superior to watcott. if you compare the guys who ko'd patterson to the guys who ko'd watcott then there is no contest! patterson has a stronger chin, is faster, and has more punching power. patterson in 6 if it goes that far.

Southpaw Stinger
02-04-2006, 03:50 PM
Floyd Patterson by mid round KO.

sleazyfellow
02-04-2006, 05:10 PM
both have very good left hands but i think floyds left was more powerful, so yeah floyd by round 5 or earlier

DaddysBoy
02-04-2006, 05:16 PM
Definitely patterson. too fast and powerful for glass chinned walcott. i say patterson kicks his ass from round 1 and until the kayo in round 5-6.

Dempsey 1919
02-04-2006, 05:20 PM
I'm going with Walcott. He had more depth with his skillset, wasn't so straightforward in style. Also he was a bigger naturally stronger man.

they were the same size.

Kid Achilles
02-04-2006, 05:44 PM
Uh, no they weren't. Patterson was a frail little guy, his wrist circumerence was around 6 inches. He may have weighed about 190 but he was a smaller man than Ingo Johanson when they fought and would be smaller than Walcott in regards to his physical dimensions. So he was smaller and weaker than Walcott. Punching power was about even and Patterson quicker by far. Walcott was a better boxer and had a better defense. Patterson had quick hands but wasn't hard to find at all.

I go with Walcott.

Dempsey 1919
02-04-2006, 05:46 PM
Uh, no they weren't. Patterson was a frail little guy, his wrist circumerence was around 6 inches. He may have weighed about 190 but he was a smaller man than Ingo Johanson when they fought and would be smaller than Walcott in regards to his physical dimensions. So he was smaller and weaker than Walcott. Punching power was about even and Patterson quicker by far.

That all means nothing because Walcott was a better boxer and had a better defense. Patterson had quick hands but wasn't hard to find at all.

uhmm, watcott was like 38 when he weighed 195, and patterson was like 25 when he weighed 190. if they were the same age, then they would weight the same.

Dempsey 1919
02-04-2006, 05:47 PM
Uh, no they weren't. Patterson was a frail little guy, his wrist circumerence was around 6 inches. He may have weighed about 190 but he was a smaller man than Ingo Johanson when they fought and would be smaller than Walcott in regards to his physical dimensions. So he was smaller and weaker than Walcott. Punching power was about even and Patterson quicker by far. Walcott was a better boxer and had a better defense. Patterson had quick hands but wasn't hard to find at all.

I go with Walcott.

punching power goes to patterson, speed go to patterson, defense goes to patterson, chin goes to patterson, size about the same.

Da Iceman
02-04-2006, 06:08 PM
walcott's defense was top rank but patterson still ko's him

Kid Achilles
02-05-2006, 12:22 AM
Explain to me how Patterson had a better defense when that was one of his weak points. Did you ever see the first fight with Ingemar Johansson? He could have thrown that right hand behind his back and found Patterson's chin.

Floyd Patterson was an exciting fighter with blitzing handspeed and good power, but he was not a better defensive boxer than Walcott.

As for his chin, no way in hell is it better than Walcotts. Patterson may have had the worst chin of any HW champion.

Dempsey 1919
02-05-2006, 01:01 AM
As for his chin, no way in hell is it better than Walcotts. Patterson may have had the worst chin of any HW champion.

paterson had a worse chin? if you say patterson has the worst chin then you obviously have never heard of watcott. watcott was ko'd by 5 different people in his career, some of them few have ever even heard of. patterosn was ko'd only by two different people, liston and johansson (ali only stopped him not ko him). watcott has one of the worst chins ive ever seen. he was ko'd by absolute bums. patterson on top of that fought better people than watcott, but still managed to get stopped less times. so their is no comparison.

Kid Achilles
02-05-2006, 01:19 AM
Walcott fought half starved in many of his early bouts and in some of those fights he very well may have taken a dive.

Anyway, you're only looking at who had knockout losses to who. Just watching film of the two you can see that Walcott clearly reacts to a shot better. If you want to go the statistic root, Patterson was knocked down more than any other heavyweight champion, including in one match against a guy making his pro debut.

Patterson had the inferior chin and anyone with a good grasp of heavyweight history would agree with me. You're just trying to build up Patterson because he was an Ali opponent. You attempted to do the same thing with Mildenberger in the "greatest southpaw HW" thread.

I am done arguing with you on this thread. I can only take so much of your biased nonsense in one sitting.

M26
02-05-2006, 09:07 AM
Jersey Joe Walcott definitely would be Floyd Patterson superior in both the chin and defense department. Patterson had no chin, and his defense was poor.

Kid Achilles
02-05-2006, 05:44 PM
Another thing, who hasn't watched the first Walcott-Marciano fight where Jersey Joe takes some hard shots from an all time great puncher and takes them well? That famous photograph of Walcott's face distorted by a Marciano right, that wasn't the shot that knocked him out. Walcott took that punch. Also the punches he took against Joe Louis, who while not at his best was still a dangerous hitter. Walcott didn't have the best chin of all time but he was durable.

That he would compare Patterson's chin favorably with Walcott's is just another example of how biased Butterfly is with his arguments when it comes to Ali or Ali's opponents.

Dempsey 1919
02-05-2006, 05:45 PM
Walcott fought half starved in many of his early bouts and in some of those fights he very well may have taken a dive.

Anyway, you're only looking at who had knockout losses to who. Just watching film of the two you can see that Walcott clearly reacts to a shot better. If you want to go the statistic root, Patterson was knocked down more than any other heavyweight champion, including in one match against a guy making his pro debut.

Patterson had the inferior chin and anyone with a good grasp of heavyweight history would agree with me. You're just trying to build up Patterson because he was an Ali opponent. You attempted to do the same thing with Mildenberger in the "greatest southpaw HW" thread.

I am done arguing with you on this thread. I can only take so much of your biased nonsense in one sitting.

yeah, sure watcott reacted to a shot better. of course if you fought marciano you would react to a shot better than if you fought liston, that doesn't mean his chin is better than patterson. again, patterson fought better competition. i'm building up patterson? it's not like i just said patterson was better without giving any reasons. and you don't know if walcott took dives, so enough said on that. again, watcott was knocked out by guys i never even heard of. on top of that, he has more than twice as many losses as patterson. don't paint me as an ali nuthugger, especially on threads that have nothing to do with ali like this one or threads that i have not even mentioned ali like this one. patterson is superior to watcott because he is. if you read the thread about top 10 favorite hw's watcott is fifth on my list, and patterson is seventh, so if i was "building up" a fighter it would be watcott, wouldn't it? but no, i'm saying patterson is better because i think he is, not because i like him better than watcott, because i don't.

Dempsey 1919
02-05-2006, 06:05 PM
Another thing, who hasn't watched the first Walcott-Marciano fight where Jersey Joe takes some hard shots from an all time great puncher and takes them well? That famous photograph of Walcott's face distorted by a Marciano right, that wasn't the shot that knocked him out. Walcott took that punch. Also the punches he took against Joe Louis, who while not at his best was still a dangerous hitter. Walcott didn't have the best chin of all time but he was durable.

That he would compare Patterson's chin favorably with Walcott's is just another example of how biased Butterfly is with his arguments when it comes to Ali or Ali's opponents.

marciano has by far the most overrated punching power of any hw. on patterson's best night (johannson in '60) he could have taken the same punishment watcott took.

Yogi
02-05-2006, 07:49 PM
paterson had a worse chin? if you say patterson has the worst chin then you obviously have never heard of watcott. watcott was ko'd by 5 different people in his career, some of them few have ever even heard of. he was ko'd by absolute bums.

You're the one who is in no position to judge Walcott, Butterfly, if you've never heard of Tiger Jack Fox or Abe Simon...Fox was considered one of the very hardest p4p hitters during his time (#51 on Ring's Greatest Punchers) and is still to this day considered one of the hardest hitting Light Heavyweights of all-time. And you're obviously not familiar with Walcott taking the Abe Simon fight on last minute notice (two or three days), and their's still to this day arguments about the legitimacy of the knockout.

Who else besides Louis & Marciano knocked out Walcott...Al Ettore? I don't know the specifics of that fight, but for someone who excuses Ali's early performances against the likes of Banks, Cooper, and Jones, you sure do have a hypocritical attitude when it comes to other fighters who are early in their careers.

If you say Patterson had a better chin you obviously don't know enough about Walcott & his opponents to make an intelligent argument...Ever heard of fighters like Elmer 'Violent' Ray, Tommy Gomez, Lee Q. Murray, Curtis 'Hatchetman' Sheppard, Hein Ten Hoff, etc.? Probably not, but every single one of those fighters there were respected and sometimes feared for the great power in their punches, yet not a single one of them were able to stop Walcott or put him down for the count...And at least two of those guys cracked the Ring's Greatest Punchers list with Ray at #44 and Gomez at #72.

Unlike Patterson who was rarely in there with a big puncher (and was getting KO'd when he was), there were plenty of times when Walcott proved himself capable of taking the power of the hardest punching Heavyweights of his generation.

Brassangel
02-06-2006, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by Yogi:
You're the one who is in no position to judge Walcott, Butterfly, if you've never heard of Tiger Jack Fox or Abe Simon...Fox was considered one of the very hardest p4p hitters during his time (#51 on Ring's Greatest Punchers) and is still to this day considered one of the hardest hitting Light Heavyweights of all-time. And you're obviously not familiar with Walcott taking the Abe Simon fight on last minute notice (two or three days), and their's still to this day arguments about the legitimacy of the knockout.

Who else besides Louis & Marciano knocked out Walcott...Al Ettore? I don't know the specifics of that fight, but for someone who excuses Ali's early performances against the likes of Banks, Cooper, and Jones, you sure do have a hypocritical attitude when it comes to other fighters who are early in their careers.

If you say Patterson had a better chin you obviously don't know enough about Walcott & his opponents to make an intelligent argument...Ever heard of fighters like Elmer 'Violent' Ray, Tommy Gomez, Lee Q. Murray, Curtis 'Hatchetman' Sheppard, Hein Ten Hoff, etc.? Probably not, but every single one of those fighters there were respected and sometimes feared for the great power in their punches, yet not a single one of them were able to stop Walcott or put him down for the count...And at least two of those guys cracked the Ring's Greatest Punchers list with Ray at #44 and Gomez at #72.

Unlike Patterson who was rarely in there with a big puncher (and was getting KO'd when he was), there were plenty of times when Walcott proved himself capable of taking the power of the hardest punching Heavyweights of his generation.

This basically sums up the total of butterfly's posts in regards to fighters from the 1960's and 1970's. He will then tell you that none of those fights with Walcott matter, because those fighters weren't as good as Liston or Johansson. Maybe Walcott was knocked out by a guy who couldn't hit as hard as Liston, but Liston knocked Patterson out lightning quick; twice. Walcott rebounded better than Patterson ever did from a powerful knock down, and he was also a far less timid fighter. Who you would rather have on your resume doesn't matter. Walcott was clearly a tougher individual with better defense.

Does this mean that he beats Patterson? No, because their losses don't matter once they'd step into the ring with each other. Also, stating that you have never heard of the fighters who floored Walcott weakens your argument further, because it proves that your knowledge of this sport is very limited and specific (ie: the era surrounding and including Ali).

Heckler
02-06-2006, 10:27 PM
punching power goes to patterson, speed go to patterson, defense goes to patterson, chin goes to patterson, size about the same.

Some of your comments are baseless. DEFENSE to patterson? i dont think so, Walcott was a defensive fighter, and excellent at it. I would say walcott, he was technically better then patterson and i believe after a few rounds would be able to adapt. He used lots of feints, and slips etc.. I think he would trouble patterson and eventually knock him out.

Heckler
02-06-2006, 10:30 PM
Is it possible Butterfly that you always exaggerate the capabilities of fighters in the 60's and 70's because that was the time in which Ali was king, and thus having greater competiton creates a perception of him being god-like. Dont get me wrong i think the 60s and 70s in regard to fighters had the most depth, and Ali was the greatest boxer of all time... but don't you think you have a tendancy to exaggerate a lil?

Heckler
02-06-2006, 10:37 PM
Another thing while im at it. Have you noticed that all your arguments are always based around statistics? STYLES MAKE FIGHTS and its them two in the ring that matter. You should be focusing on their capabilities primarily.

Dempsey 1919
03-04-2007, 01:50 AM
bump......

ceboxer15
03-04-2007, 09:36 PM
this one's a tough call, I think Walcott winning this one by late round TKO.

duffgun
04-24-2007, 08:57 AM
a close fight but i think patterson speed would be the telling factor walcott would hurt patterson a few times but i say patterson by late ko.

dempsey1919
04-26-2007, 10:33 PM
Defense Jersey Joe Walcott
Chin Jersey Joe Walcott
power Jersey Joe Walcott
speed Floyd Patterson
skill equal

so I would go with Jersey Joe Walcott

kayjay
04-27-2007, 10:49 AM
I'll give credit to you B'fly for bumping a thread in which you were :owned:

dwidsid3d
04-27-2007, 10:56 AM
lol, i knew someone would say something like that. watcott had a better chin? patterson's chin is far superior to watcott. if you compare the guys who ko'd patterson to the guys who ko'd watcott then there is no contest! patterson has a stronger chin, is faster, and has more punching power. patterson in 6 if it goes that far.

PATTERSON had a better chin ? WALCOTT had by FAR the superior chin.

Dempsey 1919
04-27-2007, 01:31 PM
I'll give credit to you B'fly for bumping a thread in which you were :owned:

Explain how I was "owned"?

Underboss
04-27-2007, 02:08 PM
great boxers butterfly. :)


i would go for patterson. his left hook = ownage

Yaman
04-27-2007, 02:29 PM
Wich Left Hook KO was better?

Walcott ko Charles
or
Patterson ko Johansson

kayjay
04-27-2007, 03:59 PM
Explain how I was "owned"?

You had been misusing statistics and putting Achilles on the defensive, even though my boy was right the whole time, but when Yogi came in the thread he gave you a *****slapping. It's ok bro I'm not trying to give you a hard time (you know your stuff, to a great extent), but you were distorting facts to make it sound like Walcott's chin is more questionable than it was. Moreover, this was all clearly in the interest of an Ali-Marciano (or Ali-Louis) question lingering in the background. Further evidence of this is your more recent Charles-Liston poll.