1991 foreman vs Marciano

Well he took punches. So I think he deserved all his purse. It`s easy for someone outside the ring to say a fighter could or should've done more but that is a slippery slope. Again he showed up and got in the ring and got hit. If he felt for whatever reason that he couldn't continue then that is for him to say.
The rehab? that depends on whether he tested dirty and or admitted using Cocaine. If that was the case then treatment is a great opportunity that cost the average person a lot of $$$.

 

Walcott was always a great enough fighter to beat Louis one time. In fact Walcott was the guy Blackburn and co wanted to finance first. Walcott got sick so they backed Louis instead.

Charles is an ATG. No shame in losing to him. Charles beat a still capable world level joe Louis. Look what Joe did to Charles face.

Why would anybody expect Joe to be as magnificent as he was against buddy Bear his whole life?

He was never less than World class

 

Charles is not an ATG at heavyweight imo.

 

If Bivins is rated as 26th best heavyweight of all time by Ring Magazine where do you put Charles?

Pound for pound Charles is a lock. But his body of work is at heavyweight. It's nowhere else really. He was never more than a 22 year old 169 pounder before the war. After the war he was beating heavyweights and settling old scores with Lloyd Marshall and Bivins.

 

Good reply

 

Surely we must be talking top 20, or thereabouts?

 

especially if the ring Magazine has Bivins number 26...

 

I put Charles at either number 1 or 2 at light heavy, I don't rank him anywhere near the top at heavyweight.

 

And that is what is known as a cop out.

Ezzard was a light heavy only as long as Floyd Patterson was. Why not rate Floyd as a light heavyweight? That would make the same sense. Or Tunney or Schmeling? Or Braddock?

 

My own view is that Ezzard Charles was a very good heavyweight and had a nice reign as Champion. He probably was on the down side by the time he faced Marciano. I think Charles is one of those fighters that won and was an excellent technician but not necessarily a spectacular performer.

To make a tennis analogy he would be Ivan Lendl.

 

Oh dear.

 

This is it. If he didn't quit and took his beating like a man there would have been no fine and no drama. He quit on his stool however after walking back to it and there were no knockdowns and it wasn't an incredibly grueling fight, it was just two rounds.

He tried for those two rounds, was certainly in good nick to continue even if it was one way traffic and then quit.

Maybe conditioning was the reason. Maybe it was mental from drugs etc. Maybe he was scared of what George was going to do to him. He'd certainly taken some big shots both to body and head and George was going no-where.

Bert has a lot of excuses and tells some ripper stories. When asked for a summation of his career he wanted it known he was never at his best. I wouldn't take anything he says at face value given his history.

 

Where as he was utterly spectacular at Light Heavyweight and likely the greatest ever.

Heavyweight was absolutely his second best weight tho he was a damn fine heavy because he was such a great fighter.

As a 175 the guy is insane.

 

Baroudi? How much did this affect Charles performances? Or was it simply a matter of heavyweight being a different ballgame?

 

Both would be a very solid take. He definitely lost something as did Griffith imo. Baer too. Very understandable.

It may have affected him more at 175 than Heavyweight tho, just guessing.