Better Boxer: Sugar Ray Robinson Or Ezzard Charles

Charles was a great textbook basic boxer and that is absolutely perfect, no detractions from that at all,
but so was Robinson adding in the athleticism & stylist flare basically unmatched by most others, well you have to choose the SRR types...

but both are in fact great, great 1st Class Boxers.

 

This is a VERY tough call--but I give the slightest edge to SRR in that he added that stylistic "flair" to his great technical skills--(as was mentioned in the above post.)

 

Got to go Charles because he took advantage of the smallest modern era and went to HW. Ray Robinson went to WW and MW and a lot of him being more amazing and dominant then Charles(and other greats from that era) is the product of that decision. Today someone like Robinson would be a MW or WW. But most top fighters his size would join him. In his era they didn't.

Ezzard is not the LHW GOAT but hes got a list of wins over great LHWs at HW that make that a trendy internet opinion. Ray Robinson went to LHW and lost to Maxim, Ezzard Charles is 5-0 against Maxim over the course of a decade. Ray Robinsons only win who went on to be a good LHW was Bobo Olsen. Robinson didn't beat anyone who went on to be a good HW. There were small HW champs from 1949 to 1962 Robinsons whole 30s and no one he fought except Maxim was a noteworthy HW.

Murderers Row was around at MW for most of Robinsons 20s too. No Cerdan or Zale.

 

This content is protected

 

John Henry Lewis

 

Interesting is one word for it.

Most posters consider Archie Moore a top 2 LHW of all time. Charles beat Moore 3 out of 3, all at LHW. Moore was a veteran of almost 100 fights and in his 30's, so can't be considered green. Charles won one of the fights by stoppage and another by a 10-0 shut out. He was quite simply not just better, but on a different level, to arguably the second greatest LHW ever, at LHW.

Add in a couple of wins over another top 10 ATG Jimmy Bivins, whilst Charles was inside the LHW limit, plus a 3rd when he weighed 176lbs, a couple over Lloyd Marshall and Billy Smith each, as well as over Teddy Yarosz and Anton Christorforidis, all at LHW, and you have the real reason the vast majority of posters in classic have him as the GOAT at LHW.

By contrast, JHL's, who is underrated, best wins at LHW were vs Maxie Rosenbloom, Tiger Jack Fox, Al Gainer, Jock McAvoy and Len Harvey. A fine win resume, but not close to that of Charles's, solely in fights contested at LHW.

 

No really wrong answer here. Robinson for me.

 

Charles by a whisker. I prefer the men on his resume more

 

Rosenbloom has a great win resume, but lost to a lot of non great fighters. He also went 3-2 vs JHL, admittedly the 3 wins technically coming at HW. Either way, he's not in the same stratosphere as Moore.

 

Tough question because it depends what you mean by "better". My take is that Charles was more technical and more well rounded then Robinson as well as having better defense. Robinson though was much more flashy, had better footwork, and had some of the best combination punching ever. So really no wrong answer here depending on what people favor. Personally I'll go with Charles Tough question because it depends what you mean by "better". My take is that Charles was more technical and more well rounded then Robinson as well as having better defense. Robinson though was much more flashy, had better footwork, and had some of the best combination punching ever. So really no wrong answer here depending on what people favor. Personally I'll go with Charles

 

Is there a arugement for Charles over SRR for greatness?

 

Want to start by saying this is Charles v Robinson and I picked Charles and brought that up as a point to show I'm being fair.

Problems with Charles's case that are overlooked

1)Charles's bad losses to Bivins and Marshall after which Charles left for two years due to WW2. These were very severe losses where he got knocked down more times then most GOAT caliber fighters in their whole career. Marshall and Bivins knocked Charles down in their rematches as well for a total of 14 times. John Henry Lewis was never knocked out at LHW might not have been knocked down.

2)Charles was in Rings annual top 10 3 times and its really indicative of how brief his time at the weight class was. John Henry Lewis was in it 7 times from ages 18 to 24.

3)Many of Charles fights over LHW greats were at HW. In this era HW was dominated by LHW alums so it gets blended together. Wins over LHW greats at HW should count for something they are relevant. HW fights shouldn't be carrying a fighter to LHW GOAT.

4)Counting the HW fights with LHW greats Charles list of LHW feats isn't that long. He had 19 fights with LHW contenders. Theres 30 contenders who fought more. The highest is Grebs 67. John Henry Lewis has 25. Moore fought 30. Its arbitrary but doing it different isn't going to make Charles climb up any leaderboards either.

5)Charles did not win any matter of LHW belt. You'd think thats a given for the GOAT of any division. Charles lost in the semi finals of the duration title tournament to Bivins. Then he lost to Marshall and Marshall replaced Bivins when Bivins went to HW. After getting embarassed it takes time to climb back. And Ezzards 2nd LHW run was 2 years flat. Any undefeated fighter who gets beaten badly twice today in the manner Charles did is going to have to wait more then 2 years to get a title shot.

6)Charles shutout over Archie Moore was not that long after Moores surgery and did not show Charles was on a much higher level then Moore. If that trilogy starts a few years later that goes very different. Not that Charles is going to lose for sure but thats a hard fought trilogy. I don't think its a given Moore would be the GOAT otherwise and therefore you have to put Charles number 1. LHW has a large fairly balanced group of greats. Moore is not head and shoulders above the group. Hopkins honestly made the longevity thing lose its luster.