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 02-29-2008, 07:05 AM   #1
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Walcott and Charles underrated

Among all-time heavyweights, I think these guys get underrated.

I like watching these two fight each other, there's a lot of skill and variety on display even when the pace is slow. A lot of pure boxing, but not in the stick-and-move, jab-and-run mould.
Both guys know how to slip and parry with expertise, so they dont just try to out-jab each other.

If these two had come along 20 or 30 years later they would have been stars in the colour TV era, probably with a lot less tough fights to get to a title fight, bigger purses and probably rated higher today.

In their own time they suffered a hard road, the shadow of the long-reigning and explosive Joe Louis, and the stereotypical dis-interest of a press that regarded them as "Negro Fighters".

They tend to get pushed down the rankings by later champions like Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Tyson, Lewis etc. And even earlier champions who had the glamourous images or the big-money fights, like Baer, Schmeling, and certainly Dempsey and Tunney, sometimes, usually or often get put ahead of them.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-01-2008, 09:18 PM   #2
markedwardscott
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 583
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

I agree with that. Both extremely tricky fighters unlucky to have to tangle with Marciano. Both men beat the **** out of Rocky in their losses.

Walcott totally outboxed Louis in their first fight.
markedwardscott is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 09:40 PM   #3
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 14,192
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
Among all-time heavyweights, I think these guys get underrated.

I like watching these two fight each other, there's a lot of skill and variety on display even when the pace is slow. A lot of pure boxing, but not in the stick-and-move, jab-and-run mould.
Both guys know how to slip and parry with expertise, so they dont just try to out-jab each other.

If these two had come along 20 or 30 years later they would have been stars in the colour TV era, probably with a lot less tough fights to get to a title fight, bigger purses and probably rated higher today.

In their own time they suffered a hard road, the shadow of the long-reigning and explosive Joe Louis, and the stereotypical dis-interest of a press that regarded them as "Negro Fighters".

They tend to get pushed down the rankings by later champions like Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Tyson, Lewis etc. And even earlier champions who had the glamourous images or the big-money fights, like Baer, Schmeling, and certainly Dempsey and Tunney, sometimes, usually or often get put ahead of them.
Both Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles are two champions who's names have been burried in the shadows of time, as you say. They did not posses the dominace, glamour or media backing of men who either preceeded or succeeded them. Charles probably deserves to be rated just a pinch higher in my opinion, give that he probably has a slightly larger collection of better wins when combined at both lightheavyweight and heavyweight. For whatever its worth, he did manage to get an OFFICIAL win over Joe Louis, whereas Walcott's claim was a potential robbery loss. Charles also won both of their first two fights, and although Jersey rebounded in the next two, in a more modern era, we'd be less likely to see a 4 fight series between fighters after the first two had the same outcome. Charles was also competitive in both of his fights with Marciano, whereas Joe was only a tough fight for Rocky in the first match. He got killed the second time around.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2008, 09:44 PM   #4
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

Charles was a great fighter and he carried that greatness up into the HVys, Walcott was a tricky,ring savy,pin point puncher, I agree they are very underated and would have done great in the 70's, 80's 90's etc. REAL TALENT
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2008, 08:05 AM   #5
richie leon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

Charles was maybe the best lightheavyweight ever, and he was still a very good heavyweight, but i don't rhink he was an ATG at that particular weight.
Certainly ATG overall though.
richie leon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2008, 11:05 AM   #6
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
Among all-time heavyweights, I think these guys get underrated.

I like watching these two fight each other, there's a lot of skill and variety on display even when the pace is slow. A lot of pure boxing, but not in the stick-and-move, jab-and-run mould.
Both guys know how to slip and parry with expertise, so they dont just try to out-jab each other.

If these two had come along 20 or 30 years later they would have been stars in the colour TV era, probably with a lot less tough fights to get to a title fight, bigger purses and probably rated higher today.

In their own time they suffered a hard road, the shadow of the long-reigning and explosive Joe Louis, and the stereotypical dis-interest of a press that regarded them as "Negro Fighters".

They tend to get pushed down the rankings by later champions like Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Tyson, Lewis etc. And even earlier champions who had the glamourous images or the big-money fights, like Baer, Schmeling, and certainly Dempsey and Tunney, sometimes, usually or often get put ahead of them.
For what it is worth, Muhammad Ali in 1976 on ABC in a show in which he evaluated the old champions with Howard Cosell as the commentater, offered his opinion that he considered both Charles or Walcott as better than Dempsey and other old champions. In that program Ali did have a great deal of praise for Tunney, whom he considered a precursor of 'modern' fighters.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2008, 11:14 AM   #7
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Walcott and Charles underrated

They would have been held in a higher esteem if a gentleman named Rocky Marciano did not leave us with the memory of the final fights with him, but it was in there 1st fights that they proved there greatness, sometimes only fighting a great fighter brings out your greatness
Bummy Davis 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 02:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015