FOTW #21: Harold Johnson double (Charles and Pastrano)

I've got Johnson clearly outpointing Charles, 98-92 (or 8-2 in rounds in old currency). Could see it closer on another day as the rounds were generally competitive, but it was a clear win for Johnson and I can't understand how one judge had it in Charles' favour. I had Johnson sweeping the first six and then winning the eighth and the tenth.

Beautiful performance from Johnson. Everything stemmed from the jab - he controlled the range and the terms of exchange perfectly with it. Eventually, Charles was forced to completely abandon his own jab once he realised he couldn't get it going against Johnson, and instead focused on being more aggressive with his big right hand cross. He had some success in rounds 4, 5, 7 and 9 with it, but it's the only shot he could land with any half-decent consistency in the fight. Charles was the aggressor throughout, but Johnson countered brilliantly, held the centre of the ring expertly and hardly put a foot wrong for the full ten rounds.

Fast forward ten years to the Pastrano fight, and I think I'll be in a minority here - I had Pastrano winning it, only just. 144-142 on my card. I had Pastrano winning rounds 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12 and 15, and I had the ninth as a 10-10. That leaves Johnson winning rounds 1, 2, 7, 8, 13 and 14.

Contrary to what Johnson and his handlers said in the aftermath, Pastrano didn't just 'run' in this fight. His movement and footwork was outstanding, but he had the better jab on the night (not many can say that against Johnson) and on the rare occasions when Johnson got him near the ropes or really tested his chin (rounds 4 and 13 in particular) he responded with crisp shots of his own. He played the matador brilliantly and took advantage of Johnson's heavy legs.

 

I scored the Johnson - Pastrano fight for Johnson 147-142 or 8-3-4 for HJ in rounds. I gave HJ 3,5,7,8,9,13,14,15, WP got 6,10,12, and I scored 1,2,4,11 EVEN. The fight was difficult for me to score (as you can tell by the number of EVEN rounds I scored), there were few big punches landed and WP went backward for almost the entire fight and HJ followed him without cutting off the ring. HJ finally did cut the ring twice in the 14th (I think?), WP as always was moving to his left and HJ stepped to his own right. WP looked surprised, as though nobody had done that before. If HJ had cut the ring from the start he might have had the power to hurt WP, but either he didn't know how to cut the ring or he felt he could win by just following WP and jabbing without having to engage?

Like the Page - Tubbs fight, this was two good boxers whose styles didn't mesh for an exciting fight. The crowd seemed to like the fight and the judges scored it close so maybe it looked better at ringside than it did on video? For people who have seen HJ fight more, did his habit of slapping his right glove with his left glove ever cause him to get timed by an opponent? That habit looks like it could have caused him problems but maybe he wanted people to think that?

 

A thread from 2009 with a few cards

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...ezzard-charles-vs-harold-johnson-1953.134331/

 

I scored the Johnson - Charles fight for Johnson 7-3 in rounds or 97-93 on the 10 point system. I scored 1,2,3,5,6,8,9 for HJ, I scored 4,7,10 for EC. I thought HJ dominated the fight with his counters, EC threw his punches from what looked to be too far away, when he missed he was open and HJ countered him. HJ staggered EC at least once in each of the first 3 rounds. HJ, IMO dominated the fight and I'd have no problem with a scorecard that gave him every round.
It must have looked different from ringside since it was scored a split decision. It will be interesting to see more scorecards on this one since 88Chris05 and I scored it wide for HJ.

 

I had it wide as well and really don’t see a case for Charles? I guess if you give him 4-5-7-9-10 you can argue a draw? Just not sure he should get all 5 of those or any of the other 5 o felt were more clear Johnson rds.

RBR
1 HJ
2 HJ
3 HJ
4 HJ
5 HJ
6 HJ
7 EC
8 HJ
9 EC
10 EC

7-3 Johnson

 

Well I am not sure I am the voice of reason but I come in somewhere between your 2 cards. I do agree with Pat in regards to their styles not meshing well, and led to this very strategic technical affair. 2 highly skilled fundamentally sound fighters whose styles led to little risk or chances taken. Pastrano’s movement was the key to the fight for me and that is likely where he won this fight even though Johnson edged my card. This may be one of those fights where ring generalship was the deciding factor?
As a whole:
Ring generalship: Pastrano was the one dictating how this fight was fought. For the most part he was circling (not running) and jabbing darting (if you can call it that) in and out taking minimal risks but also avoiding danger. Johnson stalks but does not effectively cut the ring off (@mark ant ), and never gets the pressure he needs. Pastrano keeps this mid ring and seldom gets to the ropes.

Defense: a wash both were very effective at slipping, blocking, parrying shots or simply staying out of range

Effective aggression: very little aggression by Pastrano and Johnson’s was largely ineffective

Clean/harder punching: not much solid and Johnson scoring nice in 13 is really the only clean solid blow of the fight. Johnson might edge this but if so it is minuscule

Ring generalship to me is largely why Pastrano won this (although not on my card), and I can see scoring it for him by a pt or 2 or Johnson by a pt to 4? To me there are 11 rounds that can be scored a variety of ways.

RBR
1 HJ
2 EVEN
3 WP
4 EVEN
5 HJ
6 WP
7 HJ
8 HJ
9 HJ
10 WP
11 WP
12 WP
13 HJ
14 HJ
15 WP

Johnson 69-68 (5 pt must)
Johnson 144-143 (10 pt must)