Ezzard Charles 1950 v Rocky Marciano 1954

It still would have been a great fight. I don’t think age got to Charles in the first fight, he fought hard and won an even number of exchanges but was overwhelmed only 3 times and that edged it for marciano. It was not like ezzard didn’t have it no more. He was savage that night. Charles’s movement was neutralised by rockys ability to draw him into an exchange and break his rhythm. It always would have.

charles fought a great fight but was forced into swapping punches with a heavier hitter with a better chin. It was no disgrace and worthy of the rematch.

people disagree with me on the subject of charles's peak but if you look at ezzards record at the point of the first marciano fight he had never been beaten decisively since the war apart from that one time with walcott - who some say he may have got the decision against in their last fight. All the fights ezz lost on points between the war and meeting marciano were disputed, even the loss to valdes where he nearly scored a knockout. charles came up against a greater ratio of rated fighters after losing the title than he had since entering the HW ratings and wining and defending the title.

in Charles first 18 fights as an ex champ in just 36 months he faced 11 at that time rated heavyweight contenders a far higher ratio than 14 contenders in 4 years and 42 fights he met from the war to losing his title. he was 14-4 in these 18fights and knocked out 4 of the 7 rated contenders he beat.

this means ezzards 1951-54 win ratio is negligible against his 1946-51 record and his KO percentage was actually higher in the 36 months since losing the title against at that time rated contenders.

Make no mistake Charles was on his game when he met marciano first time around. But he was never the same Again.

 

Charles by UD

 

Charles was not very impressive against Breshore in 1950, getting booed out of the arena in a very subpar performance blamed on an injury induced layoff. Meanwhile, the first Marciano fight is often recalled as one of his best performances. He was in great shape, confident, and very hungry in 54. Much better than the Breshore stinker and his reluctant decision over Louis.

[url]http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lvI-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=T00MAAAAIBAJ&pg=4436,3643246&dq=ezzard+charles+freddie+beshore&hl=en[/url]

 

agreed.:good nice find.

 

Charles, I believe never would've been able to beat Marciano. He was just slightly too negative to win the majority of the rounds. He would've always been bruised and overwhelmed/out-worked. It's interesting, because an even more prime Charles might confident to trade in bigger exchanges with Marciano. A lot of Charles successful was to nullify Marciano's attack, specifically his left hook. But Charles had to say defense minded and only sparingly counter to do so. After the 6th round his fate was pretty much set in the right regardless. Rocky started off pretty slowly in this one. More slowly than he had in the LaStarza fight. Many lauded Charles gameness and toughness that night. Marciano himself said of the fight that it was his worse fight performance once (Although he's been seen saying it was best fight. Mainly due to it being a great exciting affair with him showing his championship qualities. Not because of his own performance, though).

 

Damage wise, the fight could be close, listening to the call, Charles did most of the big damage in the first 5 rounds, cutting the eye in round 2, and getting Marciano puff up by round 5.

Round 6 was when the tide change, and Marciano control the fight all the way up to the 15th round. Perhap loseing about 1 more round on the way to the 15th round.

Round wise, Marciano had it in the bag with with the 8-5, 9-5 and 8-6 scorecards.

Pretty close to what I had it on the radio call.

I think Charles won MOST of his rounds in the first 6 rounds before Marciano took over.

 

Charles was in excellent form at 32-33 years of age and I think his performances vs Bob Satterfield and Coley Wallace 2 explosive KO's were some of his better heavyweight work. Perhaps he saw a Marciano he thought he could beat and it motivated him but getting in the ring and doing against the man was another thing altogether.

I think Charles in these 3 fight were excellent displays of a dangerous heavyweight with regained fire but I dont think any version of Charles could beat Marciano

 

Nail. Hit. Sqaurely. On. Head. IMO...:good

 

The first fight was a war, but your right, Charles was drawn in to too many exchanges. If he boxed a moved a bit more the fight would not have been as exciting, but Charles could have won. Essentially Charles either had poor ring generalship or strategy or loved to mix it up. He did not fight as smart as he could have.

 

:good

 

I don’t like to categorise fighters but ezz was a boxer/puncher like SRR, if he nailed marciano with one good shot it was second nature to try again. IMO this is what makes boxer-punchers so great to watch. I think ezzard had great ring general ship, his close fight with Harold Johnson was pure boxing at its best. Traps and tricks all the way. I think it’s on you tube.
Its not so much ezz liked to mix it up, I just think once a fight had heated up and the openinings were there he would go for it much like ray Robinson did. Besides, maybe Marciano did not give Charles the choice to box? Maybe he forced him into the trenches anyway.

 

Marciano would always beat him I think.

 

I think Marciano forced him into the trenches anyway, like he did to everyone. Marciano was one of the best at dragging even the most disciplined boxers into a give and take war. Marciano would either force his oponent into going out of their comfort zone and going to war or he would simply overwhelm them. There was no getting around it.