[Deleted by user.]

Butchered.

Smaller technicians were disastrous against Ali. Floyd Patterson, Zora Folley, Jimmy Ellis, Jerry Quarry, Bob Foster, he dominated every single one of them, I think he actually stopped every single one of them, once he had Jones out of the way.

Charles might get through but he'd finish the fight with a head like a watermelon. He'd get absolutely battered against Ali. Bigger and faster is the single hardest combination to overcome in heavyweight boxing and it was the case here. Charles would be thrashed.

 

I don't agree. I think, at heavyweight, Floyd Patterson is right in Ezzard's class and can be picked to beat him without it being weird or strange.

Regardless, I don't think it matters where you rank Patterson relative to Charles. Ali is faster. Ali is bigger. Ali is almost as great in a p4p sense and far, far greater at heavyweight. He looks better on film best-for-best on film. If they were having a fight in the real world, very few people would pick Charles. The reason is, it's unlikley he would win.

 

I think Charles is one of the greatest fighters who has ever lived.

When I watch him hit Pat Valentino with those uppercuts, all I see is a mark. Not because he's not a very good cruiserweight, he's a great cruiserweight, but because he is smaller and slower, and relies upon technical excellence to barrack his offence, not volume, not power, technical excellence, and Ali butchers these guys.

Ali would kick his head in. Conn is a better shout than Charles based upon film because he's a proven rhythm breaker, at least. Conn would get butchered too though. Smaller fighters that have a chance against Ali are all, basically, of the same type. Speed of pressure fighters who are a little unorthodox.

 

Who was the American who responded to the referee's question about where he was between rounds that said he was in in the Garden (I think) "Getting my head kicked in"?

 

No it was older than that, forties I think.

 

Ellis was stopped and won 4 rounds on a generous card. I believe he won zero rounds on one judge's scorecard but may be wrong about that.

Yeah, of course, but if you take that approach you can't use stylistic hints about any fighter, ever, unless that fighter was the absolute equal of the one to hand and you concede Floyd may be anyway...so I'm not sure what the point is really? Ali did very well against fighters of Ezzard's size and type seems valid evidence to me.

I think he might do better than Ellis but would end the fight with a head like a watermelon.