Charles was a tad green at middleweight and obviously would have been smaller/weaker at the weight. He has a size advantage over Robinson but everything else pretty much Robinson does better, I take Robinson in a close one
why do you feel most will pick charles? darn near everyone in the universe believes that srr was the best ever even if he lost. lol
Ezzard did beat someone Robinson dodged. The best fighter that never held a title, Charley Burley. Ezzard was quick, with very good technical skills as well.
Ezzard did beat the highly vaunted Charlie Burley, someone Robinson avoided. Charles had very great technical skills as well. I don't see this being an easy fight for Sugar, if he were facing a seasoned Charles.
Can't remember who it was but I'm sure it was Ray Arcel who said something like "the word 'great' is misused today - Charles was naturally great at middleweight I don't know if even Ray Robinson could've beaten him?"
Robinson. I think young Charles proved enough with the wins over Burley, Christofordi, Basora and such that he would certainly be a handful for even the best of Middleweights, but Robinson was pure monster and dazzling. At his Middleweight best, he'd just have too much for the relatively inexperienced Charles.
Having fought Ken Overlin twice, Teddy Yarosz, Burley twice, and Basora (who later fought a draw with Robinson) in his first 30 fights, if Ezzard Charles was 'green' as a MW it must have been a dazzling shade of green. My first thought is that he would have beaten Robinson, but I was thinking of the Robinson of the Fullmer and Basilio fights, late in his MW run. Not of Robinson that fought LaMotta, but Robinson was only 36 fights in at that point. So how big of an experience edge was there? I would stand in quicksand to watch this fight, but I wouldn't bet on it. Too close, though my gut tells me to pick Charles.