Ezzard Charles v Bob Foster

Important to note, Charles had only been a pro for 2 years as well. And most of the clippings from this time really don't mention his skill but his raw power and aggression as a big middleweight. So its doubtful he was the overall technician he would become after World War II.

A crowd of app. 4,200 turned out. With a nine pound advantage at 161, Charles proved his punching power on inside fighting and kept Burley mostly on the defensive and unable to strike a telling blow. Charles took 7 rounds, splitting 1 and giving up 2 to Burley." -United Press
Retrieved from "[url]

This content is protected

[/url]"

 

I'm aware, I was just throwing the #'s out there.

I guess I'm one of few on this forum who regard Foster so highly then.

 

agreedo. i think he certainly was on the puncher side of the boxer-puncher spectrum at this point.

“Charles started out by staggering Burley with a right to the mouth in the opening session, and although the second was even, Burley didn’t take a round until the fifth. Charles smashed home two hard left hooks in the bristling fourth that had Burley hanging on.
“In the fifth and six (sic) Burley went to work and cut inside of his opponent’s mouth, but was just about finished after that. Ezzard came back to belt Burley dizzy with right across (sic) and a right uppercut in the seventh, and Charley was in plenty of trouble."- Bill McElwain


a lot of highlighting the powerpunching more than any cutieisms.

 

-No, the run started pre-Charles when he won the duration title. That is the nature of Bivins. He was a spoiler before and after Charles, clearly had a punch though as he scored knockdowns against many opponents and did KO some top LHWs at this time. He had tightly scored fights against Mauriello inbetween so I don't see evidence of some greater ability.

-Because Charles fought those fights weighing under 175.

 

I voted Charles by decision, but I don't see how you really can rule out a KO when Foster is involved at LHW.

 

I'm not so sure about the 1st fight but by his own admission he said he was in superb condition for the rematch. I'm not sure how legitimate that is considering he outboxed Williams less than a week before, but take it for what it's worth, I guess.

 

Burley must've been in pretty bad shape, then. It's hard for me to see him losing to a fighter built on aggressive punching without some clever maneuvering in there, even against a naturally larger man. Something tells me Charles was a bit more refined than is being let on by those reports, though.

 

In that same confirmation of his condition he said he would "concentrate on boxing Charles instead of trying to slug with him this time around" the implication being that Charles was probably punching his nuts off at the time. It's not hard for me to see Burley losing to a middleweight Charles- despite the inexperience and maybe lack of adult strength and durability he must have been a startling combination of speed, power, and height/reach at the weight...and no doubt had good skills of his own at the time although he was certainly lacking for experience and refinement.

 

I think the comparison to a young Hopkins (albeit an obviously more powerful version) would be apt here. So often reknowned for his grizzled craftiness in his later career and not so much early on, despite the fact that if you watch the films he's actually an exceptionally well-schooled boxer-puncher early on. Just lacking in the tactical aspect that he picked up through experience.

 

You can't rule anything out but its not likely, espeically if the LHW in question was also the #2 HW in the world if we are talking Charles 47-48.

Dick Tiger is a great LHW KO scalp..but he was 5'8" , a career 160ish, who had never above 170. Again, a great LHW win but not the same type of LHW that Charles was.

 

Charles ends the hunchback's career with a horrifying one-sided beatdown followed by suitably brutal knockout/Foster quittage.

 

Alright, I'm not doing it anymore. I continue to type out responses that get cut off by this ****ing computer's lack of connectivity. I will kill someone.

 

what do you think about a 1941 middleweight 20 year old Charles versus a peak Monzon at 160?

:stir

 

...It's interesting, what you find interesting, Long.