Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-03-2008, 05:33 PM   #31
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,652
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Final top heavyweight punchers lists. 12, 40, and 60!

Charles would be top 60 for me-just!
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-03-2008, 06:45 PM   #32
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,771
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Final top heavyweight punchers lists. 12, 40, and 60!

Quote:
OLD FOGEY Of the group that went the distance with Charles:
1. Tommy Hubert--Went 10 in Charles second fight back after 3 years in the service. Hubert survived 4 knockdowns in the 10th round. This would be a ko today. Charles stopped Hubert in a rematch a few months later.
2. Billy Smith--This is no journeyman. Smith was rated among the top 10 lightheavies six times between 1945 and 1954 and had knockout victories over Lloyd Marshall, Bob Foxworth, and Harold Johnson. Beating him by decision was no disgrace, but Charles stopped him in a rematch a few months later.
3. Erv Sarlin--Another one-time rated lightheavy, Sarlin was durable and had never been stopped when Charles fought him. He would for his career be stopped 1 time in 57 fights, by top ten heavy Rusty Payne in his last fight.
Three light heavies. I don't count them as heavies, and if Chalres hit has hard as you claim he should have stopped them.

Quote:
4. Teddy Randolph--a trial-horse type noted for being durable. Only Archie Moore stopped him in 52 fights.

5. Bill Gilliam--6' 2" 210 lb heavy who fought the best pretty consistently. He was stopped twice in 59 bouts, on TKO's to top five heavies Bob Baker and Coley Wallace. Posted wins over Baker, Nino Valdes, Hein Ten Hoff, Leonard Morrow, Omelio Agramonte, and Willie Bean.

This doesn't really seem to be as mediocre a bunch as you imply. I would note also that Charles fought 43 different men from 1946 to 1954, some several times, and ko'd 32 of them.
Fair points on Randoplh and Gilliam.

Quote:
B. The heavies Charles ko'd were not a particularly durable bunch, but they were somewhat better than you imply. Charles was the only man to ko Baksi. He was the only man to put the durable Valentino down for the count. He was one of only three men to stop Bivins, the others being Moore and monstrous hitter Lem Franklin. Layne was coming off the ko to Marciano, but still had some good fights in him. Wallace was big, young, and a contender.
I'll stand by that statement. Not particularly durable.

Quote:
C. Also, how many really durable opponents did Willard ko? Or Maher? or Gomez?
We are not going to agree here. Skills t hat produce KO's via attrion is not pure power.. This is a pure power type of thread. Maher stopped plenty of guys. Willard stopped 20 guys in 26 wins. Far better than Charles. Willard's Ko over Johnson is a harder shot than anything I ever saw Charles throw, and Charles is on at least 6-7 more films. Gomez was a flawed fighter, but great puncher. Many in the 40's felt he was going to be #1 for a while, then they found out he lacked the skills and durability. At any rate Gomez right hand was a harder punch than Charles threw from what have read.

Quote:
D. I still think the comparision of Dempsey and Slavin is odd. For example, the 'ability to take punishment'--Dempsey was stopped once. Slavin 10 times. Quite a gap.
Yet that is the comparison. Slavin at hsi best was explosive and ended soem big matches early. Slavin in his prime was not easy to stop. After he lost to Jackson he became depressed and drank too much. I did not factor in who Charles could not stop post Marciano. You should not factor in Slavin’s past his best either.

Quote:
E. There is no evidence Willard was a big puncher. You are not giving any.
He's bigger, stronger, killed a man, Ko'd Johnson who was better than anyone Charles Ko'd, wasn;t nearly as skilled, yet has a higher KO%, etc...

Quote:
F. Who makes the cut and does not make the cut depends on your own rankings. I think Charles should have made the Ring Magazine list. According to the Boxing Register, Sugar Ray Robinson ko'd 18 of 62 rated opponents. Charles ko'd 20 of 58, a better percentage. Few doubt Robinson was a deadly puncher.
Charles does not make the cut in any rankings as a puncher at heavyweight. He was one of the weaker punching linear champs of all time. Can you show me two historians who felt Chalres was a big time puncher at heavyweight? I've never seen anyone claim he hit harder than Willard. Charles hit Louis 100's of times, and could not floor him. If Charles had the power, Louis at his age and condition goes down, yet he did not. Charles KO% is extremely low. Perhaps the lowest of all 60 men on the list!!!! Sure Charles KO'd a few contenders. He fought a bunch of them, he had to KO some, but never the best ones. Not even Walcott. Sorry, I do not see Charles as a big puncher, which is what this list is all about.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 07:29 PM   #33
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Final top heavyweight punchers lists. 12, 40, and 60!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
Three light heavies. I don't count them as heavies, and if Chalres hit has hard as you claim he should have stopped them.


Fair points on Randoplh and Gilliam.



I'll stand by that statement. Not particularly durable.



We are not going to agree here. Skills t hat produce KO's via attrion is not pure power.. This is a pure power type of thread. Maher stopped plenty of guys. Willard stopped 20 guys in 26 wins. Far better than Charles. Willard's Ko over Johnson is a harder shot than anything I ever saw Charles throw, and Charles is on at least 6-7 more films. Gomez was a flawed fighter, but great puncher. Many in the 40's felt he was going to be #1 for a while, then they found out he lacked the skills and durability. At any rate Gomez right hand was a harder punch than Charles threw from what have read.



Yet that is the comparison. Slavin at hsi best was explosive and ended soem big matches early. Slavin in his prime was not easy to stop. After he lost to Jackson he became depressed and drank too much. I did not factor in who Charles could not stop post Marciano. You should not factor in Slavin’s past his best either.



He's bigger, stronger, killed a man, Ko'd Johnson who was better than anyone Charles Ko'd, wasn;t nearly as skilled, yet has a higher KO%, etc...



Charles does not make the cut in any rankings as a puncher at heavyweight. He was one of the weaker punching linear champs of all time. Can you show me two historians who felt Chalres was a big time puncher at heavyweight? I've never seen anyone claim he hit harder than Willard. Charles hit Louis 100's of times, and could not floor him. If Charles had the power, Louis at his age and condition goes down, yet he did not. Charles KO% is extremely low. Perhaps the lowest of all 60 men on the list!!!! Sure Charles KO'd a few contenders. He fought a bunch of them, he had to KO some, but never the best ones. Not even Walcott. Sorry, I do not see Charles as a big puncher, which is what this list is all about.
1. Of your three lightheavies, Charles in fact stopped two of them, and the third, Sarlin, was never stopped at lightheavy and lost only once, by TKO in his last fight.
2. Charles actually stopped more guys than Maher or Slavin did, after all.
3. "Skills that produce ko's by attrition is not pure power" Well, isn't a knockout in 100+ heat over a 37 year old man in the 26th round a ko by attrition. At what point at all did Willard show early power against anyone of substance?
4. How can anyone be certain Willard's punch which finished off old Johnson in the 26th round was a harder punch than the rights which finished off Valentino and Layne and Ray, or the left which finished off Satterfield. If Willard had finished off Johnson early, perhaps you would have a case. But in the 26th round? after an hour and a half of fighting in 100 degree heat?
5. Willard killed a man--so did Charles.
6. Who are the many in the forties who thought so much of Gomez? He fought mainly in Tampa, alligatorland in those days. He blew his first fight in New York to Johnny Flynn and in his second was blown out by Walcott. I don't think top boxing experts were pumping this guy as a future champion, at least not once they got a look at him.
7. Charles would have knocked out Louis in a finish fight. Willard just had forever to get the job done. Louis was also not easy to stop. Schmeling hit him about 75 good shots and Marciano was a top echelon puncher. Not finishing him is no great stain on Charles' escutcheon.
8. You have a point about the low ko percentage, but most of your other candidates fought nothing like his competition. And Charles did not knock out just a few contenders, but 14 of them, and how many of the men on your list can match that. He knocked out 9 who were rated at heavyweight when he fought them. How many can match that? Not many. Cooney has none at all, for example. Firpo has four.
My guess is Willard would have had 2 at the most if there had been ratings.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2008, 07:56 PM   #34
Calroid
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 341
vCash: 1956
Default Re: Final top heavyweight punchers lists. 12, 40, and 60!

Check out the record of the man that Willard killed.

William Young.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Calroid is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013