How would a prime Charles have fared against Marciano?

Lets say the Charles from (1946-1952) i.e. the man fighting here

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a9CYH5EVSY[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQGryRCbLzU[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYN2eeIuZr4[/ame]

vs Rocky at any point during his title reign.

Would an earlier version of charles fared any better against rocky than the older version later would?

 

I consider both fights victories for Charles.

 

I think Rocky deserved the first on points and his ko in the rematch is fairly emphatic imo.

However, given that you think Charles beat him in the first, do you see any room for improvement if it was a younger version of Charles fighting The Rock?

 

hmmmmmmmm on the sly I might be agreeing with you but I was expecting quite a backlash so I might hold off on making my pick till I've seen smarter people than me put forth their arguments.

 

I think Charles was in fantastic shape for both fights, so I don't think he performs any differently.

 

I heard the raido broadcast of Marciano Charles I, it sounded like Marciano won a close but clear points win imo.

 

I think from the first moore victory to the layne loss, he was in his prime.

Afterwards he was still very good, just not as good imo.

I'm gonna watch the harold johnson fight tomorrow see how I score it.

Does film exist of the valdes fight?

 

I remember reading an interview in RING magazine with Ted Lowry, who had two close fights with Marciano where he said that he couldn't see Marciano beating a prime Charles or Moore.

 

I don't think Charles looked like anything fantastic against Louis. He was a very good boxer. He was a very good boxer when he fought Marciano as well, and he didn't do anything more or better against Louis than he did against Marciano. Difference was that Marciano was coming after him nonstop, forcing him to fight hard, whereas Louis jousted with him. Joe was 187 years old at that point, , so old Joe performed pretty well. Prime Louis does away with Charles.

 

He didn't need to perform any better against louis because louis couldn't force a hard fight.

However had charles then been forced to fight had (as ray made him fight for example) he could match the opponent.

I think a better version of charles has the potential to do better, i'm just not sure how better.

 

hard to say. good question but mcgrain raised a good point that the lhw version might have fared the best. while i'm not sure i entirely agree, the 175 pound of charles was likely his best weight. the difference on the scales between he and rocky would be less than 20 pounds, his speed and sharpness would have been better.

the question is what traits did charles have that would have enabled a victory against rocky and when were those traits, and his physical prowess, at their combined peak?
and would that peak have been sufficient to beat an always in shape monster of marciano?

don't know but bears thought

 

I dont think it would make too much difference, i feel at heavyweight the heavier he came in the slower he was on his feet and i think thats the main reason for him getting KOed in Marciano II but even if it was the lighter Charles i still think i fancy Marciano to pull a UD.

 

dont forget - we havent actually seen all of the first fight with marciano....only 5 or 6 (i think) rounds were filmed....have i got that right ?

 

He beats him relatively comfortably. So do the Old Mongoose, Joe and Arnold Cream.