Is Ezzard Charles a great heavyweight?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by lufcrazy, Jun 24, 2020.



  1. FrankinDallas

    FrankinDallas Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,215
    25,867
    Jul 24, 2004
    Only issue I'd bring up re Charles vs Spinks is that Spinks was unpredictable. Maybe he'd find a way to confuse Charles and out point him. Would have been a great fight that I think we can all agree on.
     
  2. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    75,520
    15,576
    Sep 15, 2009
    From 44 to 52 he lost two debatable split decisions to Ray and Walcott. Plus he was stopped by Walcott. But he beat both mean himself as well.

    His loss to Layne is reported to be an outright robbery.

    His losses to Valdes and Johnson were reportedly dull affairs that could have easily been a draw.

    His losses to Marciano, well that's Marciano.

    So I don't think the best version of Charles ever lost to a fighter inferior to Spinks.
     
  3. Berlenbach

    Berlenbach Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,191
    1,214
    Sep 27, 2011
    You don't think any of the above were inferior to Spinks?
     
  4. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    75,520
    15,576
    Sep 15, 2009
    Only Walcott and Marciano had a clean victory over him.

    Neither of those two are inferior fighter to Spinks imo.

    I'd favour both to knock Spinks out.
     
  5. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,101
    41,915
    Mar 3, 2019
    To be fair, prime(ish) Charles was between '46 and '51, in which time he has two losses. The fight with Violent Ray and Rubber match with Walcott. Ray's win over Charles is a complete robbery. Most who were there said Charles won clearly. And Walcott hit him with Boxing's equivalent of Thor's hammer. Charles ford have 4 official wins over both, and arguable 6 actual wins and only one loss.
     
  6. Berlenbach

    Berlenbach Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,191
    1,214
    Sep 27, 2011
    Walcott and Marciano were not only ones to beat Charles. Clean victory or not (whatever that means), Layne, Ray, Bivins, Valdes, Johnson all hold wins over him too, as does Lloyd Marshall. If they can beat Charles, then Spinks is definitely in the hunt.
     
  7. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    75,520
    15,576
    Sep 15, 2009
    A clean victory means with another set of judges Charles could easily have been given the nod.
     
  8. Berlenbach

    Berlenbach Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,191
    1,214
    Sep 27, 2011
    With another set of judges, Charles might also have lost some of the fights he won, so that argument cuts both ways. One of his wins over Moore was very close, for instance.
     
  9. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    75,520
    15,576
    Sep 15, 2009
    Yes exactly, wins should also be given an asterixs where appropriate.
     
  10. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,762
    Jan 4, 2008
    That wasn't at HW, though, so it doesn't have any relevance for his HW standing.
     
  11. Berlenbach

    Berlenbach Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,191
    1,214
    Sep 27, 2011
    Just regarding the Ray fight, Oscar Fraley said something like "10 rows back Charles looked like the winner", but that closer up Ray was doing damage. He also said Charles was holding and retreating a lot, which wasn't going to do him any favours at the Garden in 1947. The AP had Charles ahead but only by a round, so I wouldn't really class that one as a robbery.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  12. Berlenbach

    Berlenbach Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,191
    1,214
    Sep 27, 2011
    I wasn't really using the Moore fight against Charles, just making the point that this kind of argument is swings and roundabouts. Most fighters have a few close ones go for and against them over their careers. If close losses are to be asterisked, why not their close wins as well?
     
    Bokaj likes this.
  13. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,101
    41,915
    Mar 3, 2019
    I've seen those, but I've also seen some of the papers (although the name escapes me) and I'm pretty sure they saw it similarly to the judge who had it for Charles. 8-2 ish, based on better boxing and sharper counter-punching.
     
  14. Reinhardt

    Reinhardt Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,700
    14,935
    Oct 4, 2016
    There's a lot of excellent commentary here from both sides , I rank Charles as one of the greatest pound for pound fighters who ever lived, but when I think of great heavyweights his name just doesn't come to mind as quickly as the usual suspects.
     
  15. cuchulain

    cuchulain VIP Member Full Member

    33,049
    8,013
    Jan 6, 2007
    Who (or how many) would you rank ahead of him ?