View Single Post
#25
Old 01-30-2013, 12:50 PM
jabsRstiff
! ! ! !
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 9,504
Rep Power: 4032 jabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond reputejabsRstiff has a reputation beyond repute
Points: 10,232.92
Bank: 123,155,625,418.64
Total Points: 123,155,635,651.56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sugarj View Post
Not only was 1948 Walcott most likely a better heavyweight than any version of Schmelling. He was also probably better at that point than any fighter Joe Louis had ever met previously. It stands to reason that Walcott is therefore the better win. It was a huge event at the time too.

[/B]
Better fighter? Yes. Better foe for Louis? Tough to say....considering Schmeling demolished a fresher Louis while the best Walcott ever did was lose a bad decision to a much older one.
Reply With Quote
jabsRstiff is offline