How would a prime Charles have fared against Marciano?

Adam, either way your not building any sort of case for Marciano or Charles here ... Charles may have been in terrific shape for a 33 year old blow up light heavyweight with over 100 fights under his belt but he was not in his physical prime for the Marciano bouts ... in addition, Louis was a completely different match up from a style stand point than Rocky .. Joe was much bigger and still had a decent enough jab to bust up Charles quite a bit ... even though Ezzard won a lop sided decision many of the rounds , especially prior to the championship rounds were very competitive .. the point is that Charles was a great light heavy and a very good but not great heavyweight ...

 

Would love to see that article ...

 

But you can listen blow by blow of the first first fight radio broadcast.

Gives you a pretty good ideal how things went down.

Charles rule the first 4 rounds, were Rocky put the gas on the pedel in round 5 and didnt slow down at all it seems.

Charles may have won 1 or 2 later rounds, but Marciano out work Charles.

 

That would be my main reason to bet in prime Charles at least once in two fights against Rocky......his hand speed also would be a good factor...

 

I have it- I'll scan it to post it here....

It is interesting. Basically a nostalgic article featuring Lowry and Keene Simmons and they give their opinions of the Rock, also some personal stories.

Lowry does say that he couldn't fathom Rocky beating Louis in his prime, and he thought Charles and Moore would beat him too.

It's interesting that both picked Marciano over Tyson...

 

And yes, I believe a younger, fresher version of Charles could have beaten Marciano, although Rocky couldn't be dismissed because of that fight changing/ending power.

 

The Peoples Revolutionary Record Book has spoken.

Marciano 47-2... with many more fights to be reviewed.

We comrades suspect it will end in 38-11.

Morons Coadunare!

 

The number of times he took on a fighter (eight total) amongst the top ten.

 

All other things being the same, the outcome would be the same.

 

Charles rose to the occassion for the first Marciano fight. It is often thought of as one of his best performances. Difficult to top that. From the footage that's available we see Charles staying off the ropes and using some fantastic upper body movement to slip Rocky.

Maybe 10 lbs lighter and a few years younger, Charles might make it a closer fight or his lack of mass and HW experience could see him perform worse. Either way, he's not stopping Rocky and he's not keeping up with his punch output for 15 rounds.

Charles was not himself in the second Marciano fight. He put on bulk and went out looking for an early knockout because he said he had no chance of repeating his first performance. He got badly hurt early by a clubbing right and lost almost every round.

 

I wouldn't bet against Marciano...

 

some intelligent points, i am with above. marciano may be a short outsider but i aint betting against that fighting spirit and fitness. he is certainley troubled by the handspeed early but charles has a lot to do to stay fresh and quick past the tenth.

 

Only way to answer the question would be if there were some accurate measure of how far Charles had slipped by the time of the Marciano fight, if even at all. I think he was around 32 years of age for the first fight, and following his two bouts with Rocky began fading fast, losing many bouts.

 

Charles was past prime but was well prepared for the fight. He trained hard and really wanted to win. He gave it everything he had in both fights. These were Charles' 98th and 99th pro fights... his 11th and 12th loss. He went just 10-13 after facing Marciano twice.

Prime Charles? I'll take Charles by close decision. Younger versions of Walcott and Moore vs. Marciano? I'll still take Marciano.

 

Are you sure that's what Seamus thinks ?:yep