Who takes it? Couple years ago I'd have said Chisora no problems. But since then he's deteriorated while Charr appears to have upped his game. A lot of people like to crap on Charr but he's got a solid defence that fighters below a certain level have trouble penetrating, and obviously hits hard enough to get anyone's attention. Chisora still has the workrate and the awkwardness, but Charr's deceptively clever in picking his shots while letting guys work themselves out on his gloves, so he could nick rounds on that basis. I think the fight would be pretty competitive now, and surprisingly entertaining provided both fighters show up for it. Charr has a bit of a mouth on him so if he could rile Chisora up we might have another Whyte type fight on our hands.
Good fight... I've wanted to see it for quite some time. Would have a bit more credibility had Chisora won his last fight though. All depends on which version shows up... Out of shape Chisora vs. Charr is probably 50.. The one who fought Whyte beats him.
Chisora loses via decision in a close fight against Charr. Every time Chisora steps up above domestic level to European he loses. His work rate is never high enough to carry a decision in a competitive fight at a certain level.
Chisora wins, based on how much better he looked vs Vitali, and the fact that Charr was KO'd cold twice since then (once by CW).
My thoughts exactly. Moreover, I personally think Charr vs Kabayel is a more intriguing contest than Charr vs Chisora.
Maybe you're right. But Charr is just unimpressive boxer in every possible way (Yes Chisora too, I know)) Maybe he's a great human being, and that's fine, but I'm very disappointed that the fighter who isn't even close to top-15 is now called WBA HW world champion.
Charr's deceptively talented but he's really, really inconsistent. At his best he's a pretty good fighter, but too often he just plods around looking the ring like he can't be bothered. Check out the Duhaupas fight if you want to see what a fired up Charr is capable of. This content is protected
Nah, this fight wasn't proof Charr is good. It was proof that Duhaupas was always trash in the first place (which I went blue in the face telling everyone after he got briefly and from the middle of nowhere overrated like crazy just because he gave Wilder a hard time). Erkan Teper was also ridiculously overrated and in the same bucket of useless (on the world class stage) Euro garbage as Charr and Duhaupas.
To be honest, I scored it for Duhaupas, and I never rated him at top-15. Charr has looked the best probably vs Vitali, and still lost every round, and that was old Vitali. Charr is decent at Euro level, like Ustinov, Teper, Kabayel, Helenius. No more than that.
Saw this fight on the box nation ...The announcer that said either of these guys beats Breazeale or 50/50......? NO they dont, they don't even beat me, god awful , but good to see a fight better than none. I actually needed a drink by the 5th round.
Like I said, I can just about see how you could give it to Duhaupas, but honestly I think Charr just did a lot more overall. Most of Duhaupas work was stay busy stuff that landed on Charr's gloves, and I can't recall him landing a single shot of consequence the whole fight. Charr by comparison caught him big on more than one occasion, and was constantly working his body hard and just looking more like the man in charge. Very unlucky not to get the decision, IMO. At any rate Duhaupas didn't 'handily' beat him. I think we can both agree on that point.
Since when did Breazeale become anything special? Amir Mansour and Izu Ugonoh both had him down and in serious trouble, and Kassi gave him all sorts of problems. Charr could definitely land some heavy shots against him, and Breazeale lacks the speed or talent to consistently break through Charr's watertight guard. I think Charr could shock a lot of people again if this fight took place.