Ezzard Charles v Bob Foster

Pretending that Foster couldn't KO Charles is just that, pretending. I'd pick Ezz to get to him first every time, he's the better, quicker boxer and a dangerous puncher himself, but Foster could KO anybody at Light Heavy. One slip up against Foster could end the night quickly.

 

Maxim was a pretty tough guy though, and at the time they fought Maxim was pretty much a Heavyweight (albeit a small one) and Charles a smallish Light-Heavyweight. Maxim was also vastly more experienced.

At Light-Heavyweight it would be fair to say he wasn't iron chinned IMO, and Foster has the power to hurt anyone.

Can you provide a source?

Ditto.

Could you provide these reports?

I do think the writer is selling Charles' skills short here, maybe it was his harder punching and speed that did it for him, but his skills allowed him to do it.

I agree 100%, I have always compared them myself.

Personally, I think Charles takes this. He has the defensive craft to be able to stay away from Fosters bigger punches whilst establishing his own crisp shots down the middle. Also when he needs to he has that superb offence to open up on Foster with.

 

"At Light-Heavyweight it would be fair to say he wasn't iron chinned IMO, and Foster has the power to hurt anyone."

Based off what exactly? During his peak LHW run after being released from the military from 46-48, he was only dropped twice by HWs and never stopped despite running a gauntlet against Moore, Bivins, Ray, Billy Smith, Baroudi, Marshall. Moore hurt him according to reports but Charles recovered instanteously and knocked him out. Moore is the same class of puncher as Foster.

"Can you provide a source?"

Charles was knocked down eight times, as follows: down for counts of one and two in the first round; dropped once in round three for a one-count; down in round five for a two-count; down for counts of one and eight in round seven; down twice for no-counts in round eight. The referee stopped the fight after the last knockdown. Charles's handlers said that he had a hip injury going into the fight. Ezzard didn't win a single round. Attendance was 10,539.


"I do think the writer is selling Charles' skills short here, maybe it was his harder punching and speed that did it for him, but his skills allowed him to do it."

We are free to speculate but this was only Charles' second year as a professional fighter, he is simply not going to be the complete fighter he evolved into 6-8 years and dozens upon dozens of fights later. And its not just one writer, every report from the time described him as an offensive aggressor/mixer. It wasn't until after World War II that we start seeing writers commenting on his boxing ability.

referee: Eddie Joseph 4-6 | judge: Marty Monroe 8-2 | judge: George LeCron 4-6
Charles "apparently won handily. . . Ray was the aggressor most of the way, but Charles was the faster, the better boxer, and the sharper hitter." (The Ring, October 1947, page 42).


"Ezzard Charles, the black ebony from Cincinnati, found a willing mixer in Billy Pryor, the Colorado middleweight, in their bout at the Music Hall Arena. Ez copped the decision at the end of ten rounds. Pryor suffered a badly cut lip in the early rounds and fought with this handicap from there on."
-The Ring Magazine, July 1942. pg 53
Retrieved from "

This content is protected

"

The Charles-Fernandez fight occurred on the Eddie Simms-Unknown Winston program, April 3, with Charles winning by decision (not April 24 and a 6-round knockout, as in Charles's published record).
"This went the route because Charles missed repeatedly but he won every step of the way. Fernandez dodged or rolled with Charles's best pokes but showed nothing else whatsoever." Source: Cincinnati Enquirer

 

Yes, but he was no Jake Lamotta and he could be hurt, Louis and Marciano staggered him and we see this on film, but he had the savvy to escape it. Maybe that was the case in these bouts? I think it is at least. He could still be hurt.

"Can you provide a source?"

Thanks for this, out of interest how legit to do you find this injury?

An 'offensive aggressor' has a very broad meaning though, for example Ray Robinson, with his dazzling offence could be classed an offensive aggressor in some of his bouts. I'd tend to think of Charles in the same mould, in his younger days he was a physical beast with aggression under-pinned by technical skills and know-how, as he advanced he became more savvy but lost that physicality due to boxing larger men.

In the film we have of him vs Marshall, he is the aggressor but we can see some lovely technical skills employed by him.

Sure, Charles was only a two year pro but he was a top amateur for a good few years before that.

Even a superb technician can be made to look like a fool by someone just focussing on defence.

 

Yes, but he was no Jake Lamotta and he could be hurt, Louis and Marciano staggered him and we see this on film, but he had the savvy to escape it. Maybe that was the case in these bouts? I think it is at least. He could still be hurt."

Anyone can be hurt. Charles proved to be a hard fighter to put down, let alone out. Outside of the questionable Marshall fight, no LHW ever dropped or stopped him.

"Thanks for this, out of interest how legit to do you find this injury? "

Considering Charles avenged the loss and never had problems staying vertical like that again, probably legit.


"In the film we have of him vs Marshall, he is the aggressor but we can see some lovely technical skills employed by him.

Sure, Charles was only a two year pro but he was a top amateur for a good few years before that."

-But that was after World War II.
-Possible, but we were disputing the poster's assumption that Charles was somehow as good and sound as ever in the Burley fights. This is doubtful.

 

Bivins turned the trick, and so did Fitzy.

He was put down in the rematch. Maybe defensively he improved?

Fair point, many felt Charles learned a lot whilst boxing in WWII.

I think Charles wasn't far off his prime against Burley.

 

-Bivins and Fitz were both above the LHW limit and competiting primarily at HW at this time.

-Yeah, Marshall did drop him in the first, so that's one. Perhaps it was a flash, improved defense, and a sturdy hip. Sorry, but it seems rather silly to dwell so much on this when the guy has an entire career of handling great punchers from 175 up. If Foster has a puncher's chance its pretty slim to none. Moore had a puncher's chance too and he lost 4 straight to the man. At best Foster might score a knockdown.

-I think Charles' best run started after World War II at LHW.

 

Maybe in a couple days i'll message them to you, I have an organic chemistry lab and test to finish.

 

Bivins and Fitz though were Light-Heavyweights, big ones albeit.

As some have said Foster has a punchers chance against anyone, really.

Take your time pal, good luck in the test

 

Thanks man, it's at 730AM sharp tomorrow... Make up test for the weeks of school i missed this semester. As for the reports, they're actually in one of the charles threads on this forum. I'll try and do some diggin around for them fridayish.

 

-Bivins fought his last fight below 175 in 1943, a good three years before the rest of the Charles fights. He was a Heavyweight. Fitz had been over 180 his previous 6 fights.

-So does Moore..perhaps even moreso than Foster. He went 0-4.

-Charles was only stopped cold by a single punch once in his entire career, against an unorthdox fighter with HW power and 37 rounds of experience against him. I don't like the odds of Foster duplicating such a feat.

 

Fair enough pal, looks like were pretty dug in.

 

Its cool, I know you actually picked Charles to win.

I just have a problem with the notion that all Foster has to do is get a lucky punch in and could take 1 out of 3. Easier said than done and my point..no gurantee he could keep the Cobra down.

 

To me the key to this fight is if Ezzard can slip the jab and close the distance correctly......
In my opinion, Foster´s reach, precision and jab (in my opinion the best jab at LHW) would be the main problem for Charles, not just the power.....I think

 

I think Charles would do a good job of being out of Fosters punching range or within his own at all times, and not be caught in the middle ground.